Global Water Research Coalition Alliance House 12 Caxton Street London SW1H 0QS United Kingdom Phone: + 44 207 654 5545 www.globalwaterresearchcoalition.net

IWA affiliate

Water and Energy

Report of the GWRC Research Strategy Workshop

May 2008

2

Global Water Research Coalition Global cooperation for the generation of water knowledge

GWRC is a non-profit organization that serves as a collaborative mechanism for water research. The benefits that the GWRC offers its members are water research information and knowledge. The Coalition focuses on water supply and wastewater issues and renewable water resources: the urban water cycle. The members of the GWRC are: the Water Research Foundation (US), CRC Water Quality and Treatment (Australia), EAWAG (Switzerland), KWR (Netherlands), PUB (Singapore), Suez Environment- CIRSEE (France), Stowa - Foundation for Applied Water Research (Netherlands), DVGW – TZW Water Technology Center (Germany), UK Water Industry Research (UK), Veolia- Anjou Recherché (France), Water Environment Research Foundation (US), Water Research Commission (South Africa), WateReuse Foundation (US), and the Water Services Association of Australia. These organizations have national research programs addressing different parts of the water cycle. They provide the impetus, credibility, and funding for the GWRC. Each member brings a unique set of skills and knowledge to the Coalition. Through its member organizations GWRC represents the interests and needs of 500 million consumers. GWRC was officially formed in April 2002 with the signing of a partnership agreement at the International Water Association 3rd World Water Congress in Melbourne. A partnership agreement was signed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in July 2003. GWRC is affiliated with the International Water Association (IWA).

3

Disclaimer

This study was jointly funded by GWRC members. GWRC and its members assume no responsibility for the content of the research study reported in this publication or for the opinion or statements of fact expressed in the report. The mention of trade names for commercial products does not represent or imply the approval or endorsement of GWRC and its members. This report is presented solely for informational purposes.

Copyright © 2008 by

Global Water Research Coalition

ISBN 978-90-77622-20-9

4

Contents

Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................ 5

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 6

Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 7

Knowledge gaps and research needs .......................................................................................... 9

Research Strategy ...................................................................................................................... 15

Conclusion and follow up .......................................................................................................... 18

Appendixes

A. Project Proposals B. Workshop Programme C. List of Participants D. Overview of the Workshop Presentations E. Knowledge gaps and Research needs F. Data on Energy Use in the Urban Water Cycle G. Information on GWRC Members activities

5

Acknowledgement The project team members wish to express their gratitude to all members of the Global Water Research Coalition and to the participants in the workshop who made valuable contributions to the project. Project Team

Linda Reekie, Water Research Foundation (USA)

Pauline Avery, UK Water Industry Research (United Kingdom)

Lauren Fillmore, Water Environment Research Foundation (USA)

Steve Kaye, Anglian Water (UK)

Steve Whipp, United Utilities (UK)

Frans Schulting, Global Water Research Coalition (NL)

Participants

Rob Renner, AWWA Research Foundation (USA)

Carlos Peregrina, CIRSEE - Suez Environnement (France)

Jan Hoffman, Kiwa Water Research (The Netherlands)

Theo van den Hoven, Kiwa Water Research (The Netherlands)

Harry Seah, Public Utility Board (Singapore)

Lee Mun Fong, Public Utility Board (Singapore)

Koh Tee Guan, Public Utility Board (Singapore)

Bert Palsma, STOWA (The Netherlands)

Tom Voskamp, Waterboard Regge and Dinkel (The Netherlands)

Sebastian Sturm, DVGW Technologiezentrum Wasser (Germany)

Mike Farrimond, UK Water Industry Research (United Kingdom)

Elise Cartmell, Cranfield University (United Kingdom)

Issy Caffoor, Environmental KTN (United Kingdom)

Gordon Wheale, UK Water Industry Research (United Kingdom)

Jim Goodrich, US Environmental Protection Agency (USA)

Chris Impellitteri, US Environmental Protection Agency (USA)

Michel Gibert, Veolia Environnement (France)

Francois Vince, Veolia Environnement (France)

Gerhard Offringa, Water Research Commission (South Africa)

George Crawford, WERF/CH2M-Hill (USA)

6

Executive Summary Over the last decade, energy consumption by the water and wastewater sector has considerably increased as a result of the implementation of new technologies to safeguard water quality and to meet new regulations. The price of energy has also substantially increased in the same period, leading to a sharp rise in the operating costs of water and wastewater companies. The topics of optimisation of energy use, more energy efficient equipment and technologies, and energy recovery have entered the research agenda as companies strive to both to control their operating costs and to make a contribution to the global challenge of reducing the emission of Green House Gases (GHGs). A workshop was organised in London (February 2008) to review the present knowledge and ongoing activities and to develop a phased research strategy on Water and Energy that can be used by the GWRC members to identify collaborative research opportunities. The participants at the workshop consisted of about thirty representatives of GWRC’s organisations and invited experts. Countries represented at the workshop included France, Germany, Netherlands, Singapore, UK, USA and South-Africa. A three phase strategy with associated project proposals was developed to support the water and wastewater industry to achieve an energy and carbon neutral urban water cycle by 2030:

� Implement the present State of the Art: - picking the ‘low hanging fruit’; � Reduce the energy consumption by 20%: -optimisation and innovation; � Reduce the energy consumption by a further 80%: -a paradigm shift!

From the 15 project proposals developed by the workshop participants, the project Energy

Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies and the development of the Toolbox of Integrated Performance Evaluation would directly support the water and wastewater industry in its journey toward an energy efficient and carbon neutral urban water cycle. The project Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy

reduction could be considered to coordinate and complement the present research activities by individual GWRC members and other related research initiatives.

7

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Over the last decade, energy consumption by the water and wastewater sector has considerably increased as a result of the implementation of new technologies to safeguard water quality and to meet new regulations. The price of energy has also substantially increased in the same period, leading to a sharp rise in the operating costs of water and wastewater companies. The topics of optimisation of energy use, more energy efficient equipment and technologies, and energy recovery have entered the research agenda as companies strive to both to control their operating costs and to make a contribution to the global challenge of reducing the emission of Green House Gases (GHGs). At the meeting of the GWRC Board of Directors in Sydney (November 2007), it was agreed to add the area Water and Energy to the GWRC research agenda and to explore the potential for collaborative research within the GWRC framework. A workshop was organised to review the present knowledge and ongoing activities and to develop a phased research strategy. This report summarises the proceedings of that workshop and presents a research strategy on Water and Energy that can be used by the GWRC members to identify collaborative research opportunities.

1.2 Objective and Approach of the Workshop

1.2.1 Objective

The objective of the workshop was to present the current state of knowledge on energy efficiency in the water cycle and to identify knowledge gaps and research needs. Based on the knowledge gaps, a research strategy represented by a selection of prioritised research projects was developed.

1.2.2 Approach

As a first step (in preparation for the workshop), data regarding energy use in the urban water cycle in the GWRC member countries were collected, and information was shared on ongoing (or recently completed) energy projects. A workshop was then organised to exchange and discuss the available information, knowledge and know-how from various countries/regions of the world and to develop a research strategy within GWRC on water and energy. The workshop was held in London on 20th - 21st February 2008, hosted by UKWIR. The participants at the workshop consisted of about thirty representatives of GWRC’s organisations and invited experts. Countries and regions represented at the workshop included France, Germany, Netherlands, Singapore, UK, USA and South-Africa.

8

1.2.3 The Workshop Programme

The programme of the workshop is given in appendix B. The first session of the workshop was dedicated to a review of the current state of the knowledge, with invited speakers introducing the significance of energy in the water sector, the links to Climate Change and the options for Energy and Resource Recovery. GWRC member representatives then gave presentations on their available knowledge and research activities. (The overview of the presentations of the workshop is given in appendix D. The detailed presentations are available in a separate document accessible at the members’ section of the GWRC website). The overall gaps in knowledge and research needs were discussed and identified by the workshop participants in three breakout groups and subsequently summarized and clustered in a plenary session. On the second day, new breakout groups were constituted to identify the research priorities and to develop project proposals around three overarching themes resulting from day one. Project proposals were presented and discussed in plenary session and a first prioritisation and survey of member interest to support the projects was made. As a result, a preliminary outline of an overall research strategy was made. The feedback by the participants of the workshop was overall very positive and included suggestions for further improvement to GWRC processes.

9

2. Knowledge gaps and research needs

2.1. Energy and the Water Cycle

In today’s world, water and energy are tightly linked. The availability of adequate water supplies has a profound impact on the availability of energy, while the energy production and power generation activities affect the availability and quality of water. Energy is needed for the production and distribution of drinking water as well as the collection and treatment of wastewater: the urban water cycle. Water is essential for the generation of energy including hydropower and as cooling water in power plants. (See figure 1)

WATER FOR ENERGY

ENERGY FOR WATER

Hydropower

Thermo electric Cooling

Fuel Production (Ethanol, hydrogen)

Extraction & Refining

Extraction and Transmission

Drinking Water Treatment

Waste Water

Treatment

Energy Associated with Uses of Water

Figure 1. Water and Energy relationship

Both water and energy industries are confronted with a growing demand, limitation of resources, the impact of climate change and pressures to operate in a more sustainable manner. The scope of this workshop was limited to the energy aspects of the urban water cycle (see figure 2) with a focus on the energy efficient design and operation of the industry’s assets. Water demand for energy production and the energy aspects of the use of supplied water by customers was only indirectly addressed during the discussions. The main focus was on those aspects which can be directly controlled by the water and wastewater industry itself.

10

PotablePotable

reusereuse

Waste water Waste water

reclamation/reusereclamation/reuse

Industrial Industrial

water usewater use

surfacesurface

waterwater

WaterWater

treatmenttreatmentMunicipal Municipal

useuse

Irrigation Irrigation

Precipitation Precipitation

Atmospheric water Atmospheric water vapor vapor

Surface waterSurface water

GroundGround

waterwater

Ground waterGround water

Ground water rechargeGround water recharge

PotablePotable

reusereuse

Waste water Waste water

reclamation/reusereclamation/reuse

Industrial Industrial

water usewater use

surfacesurface

waterwater

WaterWater

treatmenttreatmentMunicipal Municipal

useuse

Irrigation Irrigation

Precipitation Precipitation

Atmospheric water Atmospheric water vapor vapor

Surface waterSurface water

GroundGround

waterwater

Ground waterGround water

Ground water rechargeGround water recharge

Figure 2. Schematic picture of the urban water cycle. However, it should be realised that the energy consumption by the end user (consumer) of water significantly exceeds the energy used in the urban water cycle itself. Relative to local circumstances it is estimated as 4-8 times the energy consumption of the urban water cycle itself. Hence, water conservation by the consumer will result in a substantial decrease of energy use. Water conservation has a threefold effect on the energy use:

- less energy needed for the collection and treatment of wastewater. - less energy needed for the production and distribution of drinking water - less energy use by the consumer (i.e. heating).

11

2.2 Review of current knowledge and activities.

Part of the workshop was dedicated to the exchange and review of current knowledge. GWRC organisations had provided information regarding their completed and ongoing activities in advance of the workshop. The information is included as annex G of the report. They also provided, (where available), data regarding the energy use in their countries for the different parts of the urban water cycle: water treatment and supply and wastewater collection and treatment.

Table 1. Energy Data as provided by the GWRC members and partner (kWh/m3)

USA NL SIN FRA GER UK SA AUS

Water

Total Energy 0,43 0,47 0,45 0,57 1,01 0,1 - 0,5

Treatment 0,05 0,47 0,10 0,1- 0,3

Supply 0,40 0,10 0,91

Wastewater

Total Energy 0,56 0,52 0,67 0,4 - 0,9

Treatment 0,45 0,36 0,42 0,43 0,64 0,39

Collection 0,15 0,09 0,1 - 0,6

It is interesting to note (see table 1) that the average energy data for the different countries is in a comparable range, despite the fact that the data relates to the various treatment options used in each country. All provided data are included as annex F of the report. The workshop included three key-note presentations regarding the Role of Energy in the Urban

Water Cycle, Climate Change and Energy Connection, Energy and Resource Recovery. Together with the presentations by the GWRC organisations, they formed the building blocks to sketch the ‘map of knowledge’ (what do we know – what not) and the discussion on research needs and possible joint research projects. The presentations addressed a large variety of topics related to the energy aspects of the urban water cycle as illustrated in figure 3. The list of presentations made by the participants at the workshop is included as annex D.

12

Figure 3. Different topics related to the energy aspects of the urban water cycle.

The overall conclusion by the participants of the workshop was that a substantial amount of valuable information and knowledge is available within the GWRC membership and beyond. It was also concluded that the current urban water cycle systems (especially wastewater treatment systems) have substantial opportunities for energy conservation and recovery.

Furthermore, with the present energy consumption and costs of energy, considerable cost savings are achievable. Those cost savings, in the long term will balance the investments needed in research and to implement the results in daily practice to realise a more efficient use of energy in the urban water cycle. Of course, this return on investment will be easier and more quickly realised in greenfield areas compared to their implementation in existing infrastructures.

Water & Energy - Optimisation - New concepts

Benchmarking - Methodology - Best practices

Resource recovery - Energy - H2O, P, N, … .

Climate change - Water patterns - GHG emissions

Alternative sources - Brackish/sea water - Used water, … .

Level of Service - Product quality - Consumers

Renewable energy - Fuel cells, algae oil - Solar, wind, … .

Urban Water Cycle - Optimisation - New concepts

Benchmarking - Methodology - Best practices

Resource recovery - Energy - H2O, P, N, … .

Climate change - Water patterns - GHG emissions

Alternative sources - Brackish/sea water - Used water, … .

Level of Service - Product quality - Consumers

Renewable energy - Fuel cells, algae oil - Solar, wind, … .

13

2.3 From knowledge gaps to research needs

Following the presentations and discussion of the current knowledge and activities, the participants identified in 3 break-out group the gaps of knowledge and possible topics for research to address the gaps. In the break-out groups, both 'big picture' as well as ‘in depth' discussions were held. The 'big picture' discussion was needed to give focus to the rather broad area of water & energy (climate change, recovery and renewable energy, alternative water resources, optimisation/innovation, regulations, etc), the drivers and time scale to be considered for the possible activities. Some 63 topics were identified by the breakout groups and during the plenary discussion related topics were clustered in 12 categories (see table 1). All individual topics are listed in annex E.

Table 2. Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs

Knowledge exchange - State of the Science

Capabilities and limitations of present systems

Future concepts/innovation and scenario planning

Implementing new concepts and making innovation happen

Communication strategies, engagement and image (PR)

Analytical toolbox, modelling

Whole life carbon costing

Benefit cost analysis (BCA)

Technology improvement

Energy recovery, content and management

Small scale systems

Infrastructure and other sectors

To discuss and devise proposals for possible projects/actions, the 12 themes have been grouped around three more comprehensive categories:

� new technologies (included the results of the Energy Recovery/Sludge workshop and report in 2007);

� tools for performance evaluation (energy efficiency, GHG emission, costs, ..); � future concepts and scenario planning.

14

2.4 Project proposals The participants developed in three breakout groups 15 draft project proposals to address topics within the 3 categories resulting from the initial discussions during the workshop. The project titles and a first indication of the budget involved (in kEuro) are given in the table below. The full project proposals are presented in Appendix A .

Table 2. List of project proposals

Project Title Budget

Exchange of information

1 Energy efficiency in the water sector: a Compendium of Best Practice 150

Future concepts and scenario planning

2 Define and understand the language 100

3 Minimising energy of existing systems without compromising quality objectives

50 + ?

4 External factors influencing process choice and optimisation 100 + ?

5 An Energy efficient urban water cycle – concepts for the future 200

6 Designing future concepts in existing systems 100

7 Demonstrations of new concepts TBD

Tools for performance evaluation

8 State of the art review-gap analysis 100

9 Performance assessment 300

10 Water treatment, urban water cycle and wastewater treatment (3 projects) 3x 200

12 Communication for decision making 100

Technology

13 Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy reduction TBD

14 Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations with another 80% energy reduction TBD

15 Application of nanotechnology to membranes to improve energy utilization in water and wastewater applications

TBD

In the final plenary session, a category Exchange of Information was added to combine and address the different issues of the Water & Energy topic in a coordinated manner. It was felt that the projects 1 and 8 have the highest priority, followed by project 13. Project 1 would enable the water and wastewater industry to make directly use of available knowledge and proven practices. Project 8 would initiate the development of a comprehensive toolbox for the performance evaluation of current and new concepts and systems. Project 13 (in combination with results of project 1) would result in substantial reduction of the energy consumption by the wastewater treatment systems within a relative short timeframe. Following the workshop, nominated participants redrafted the project proposals to add more detail to the background and scope of work of each project.

15

3 Research Strategy

3.1 Water and Energy: a roadmap to the future

As part of the global developments regarding the availability and cost of energy, as well as the mitigation and adaptation measures needed to face climate change, the water and wastewater industry is challenged to review its present way of operations. Optimisation of energy use and the limitation of linked GHG emissions are issues to be considered. To address the above, the participants of the workshop formulated as a common goal and ambition of the water and wastewater industry for the coming era:

An energy and carbon neutral urban water cycle by 2030. The year 2030 is chosen as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) indicates that year as critical (‘point of no return’) where 60% reduction of GHG emissions should be achieved to limit a global temperature increase to less then 30C. In achieving these objectives, the water and wastewater industry will be able to realise substantial cost savings, since after manpower, energy is the highest cost item of the industry. It should also be less dependent on the availability of energy, and by minimising the carbon footprint deliver a considerable contribution to the reduction of GHG emissions. Moreover, with this challenging ambition the water and wastewater industry shows its leadership on the road to a more sustainable society (‘green frontrunner’) and illustrates the proactive attitude of the sector towards regulators. As a spin-off of these developments, the water and wastewater industry advertises itself as a responsible, eye-catching employer on the competitive market which supports efforts to attract and keep a talented and skilled workforce. A three phase approach and related set of actions to be taken by the water and wastewater industry is formulated to achieve this goal and ambition:

1. Implement the present State of the Art: picking the ‘low hanging fruit’; 2. Reduce of the energy consumption by 20%: optimisation and innovation; 3. Further reduction of the energy consumption by another 80%: a paradigm shift!

The key items of the approach are highlighted in the next paragraphs and possible supporting actions and projects by the GWRC members are indicated. Figure 4 illustrates the impact of the approach over time. Step 1. Implement the present State of the Art – picking ‘low hanging fruit’ During the discussions throughout the workshop it became crystal clear that a vast amount of information, knowledge and practical know-how regarding the management of water and wastewater infrastructure in a more cost-effective, energy efficient manner is available somewhere in the global water community. Implementation of the current best practice in today’s operations would be a first, easy to make step and a significant contribution to achieve

16

the above worded objectives: it is picking the ‘low hanging fruit’ to bring every utility on the same page. The GWRC members can support this activity by making the information on the present State of the Art available with the project Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of

Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies. (See also chapter 2 and annex A). Step 2. Reduce of the energy consumption by 20%: optimisation and innovation The existing systems in the water and wastewater industry have not reached the limits of energy efficiency gains yet. It is estimated that through optimisation of operations, retrofitting and fitting of innovative technologies, a reduction of the energy consumption by 20% is quite feasible. Within the global water community a number of substantial efforts are ongoing to explore the possible options including the recovery of energy during the processes, the use and/or production of renewable energy and energy conservation. Examples include the EU project NEPTUNE led by EAWAG and the WERF Optimisation Challenge. The GWRC members can support this activity with projects like ‘Minimising energy of Existing

Systems without compromising quality objectives’ and ‘Revamp Wastewater Treatment

Operations with 20% energy reduction’ to facilitate the development and implementation of new technologies and ways of working. Step 3. Further reduction of the energy consumption by another 80%: a paradigm shift! The current water infrastructures have been designed and constructed on the basis of views, requirements, conditions and technologies of decades ago. It is recognised that the present systems of wastewater treatment, water treatment and distribution are very energy intensive. It is emphasised that a new conceptual approach – a paradigm shift - of the urban water cycle is needed to achieve further reduction of energy use and achieve the objectives listed above. New concepts could include topics like alternative sanitation approaches (vacuum system, separation at the source); from waste towards resource (phosphor and nitrogen recovery; wastewater as nutrient for algal based biofuel); microbial fuels cells; tailored water quality and use of alternative resources etc. The water and wastewater sector could benefit from technology developments and breakthrough in related areas such as i.e. energy production, sensor development, nanotechnology etc. During the workshop a number of project outlines were developed to support the paradigm shift needed. Topics included are:

• An Energy efficient urban water cycle – concepts for the future,

• Designing future concepts in existing systems,

• Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operation (2030),

• Nanotechnology based Membranes, and Demonstrations of new concepts.

Global mega events such as the Olympic Games take place every four year and could well serve as effective opportunities to develop, implement, and show case new concepts for the urban water cycle.

17

At the workshop it became clear that the availability of a set of tools (‘toolbox’) for Integrated

Performance Evaluation is a prerequisite for an adequate comparison of present and new systems, and possible options and opportunities for improvement. A set of project proposals were developed to create this toolbox. In an ideal world, the toolbox should be available from the start of the journey towards an energy and carbon footprint neutral urban water cycle. Figure 4. Energy use over time with and without optimisation and new approaches in the urban water cycle; 2008 as reference point (100%)

Regarding the time scale, a differentiation can be made between the low-hanging fruit (< 2010), optimisations/technological innovations (< 2015-2020) and a paradigm shift/new concepts (< 2030). In an optimal timeframe, the supporting activities by the GWRC members of step 1 (picking low

hanging fruit) with the project Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of

Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies) and the development of the Toolbox of integrated

Performance Evaluation would start directly. As the next action, the discussion on and the development of supporting projects and activities for step 2 and 3 should be initiated to detail and start the projects needed. The project Revamp

Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy reduction could be considered to coordinate and complement the present research activities by individual GWRC members and other related research initiatives (i.e. EU projects NEPTUNE and INNOWATECH). The year 2030 is nearby. A brief document Water and Energy: a roadmap to the future! to describe the overall goals, objectives and benefits, the drivers and background of the foreseen projects would be of help to communicate these activities by the water and wastewater sector, as well as to support discussions with possible co-funders of the projects at national/international levels.

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 2008 2015 2030

Optimisation

New

approaches

Paradigm shift

18

4 Conclusion and follow up The main goals of the workshop were:

• the exchange of information and the review of existing knowledge and know-how within the GWRC membership and associated organisations

• to develop a phased research strategy and portfolio of projects. Based on the received feedback it can be concluded that the combination of a pre-workshop background information and in-depth discussion at the research strategy workshop were very supportive to successfully achieve these goals. A three phase strategy with associated projects by GWRC members has been developed to support the water and wastewater industry to achieve an energy and carbon neutral urban water cycle by 2030:

� Implement the present State of the Art: - picking the ‘low hanging fruit’; � Reduce the energy consumption by 20%: -optimisation and innovation; � Reduce the energy consumption by a further 80%: -a paradigm shift!

In an optimal timeframe, the supporting activities of step 1 (picking low hanging fruit) by the GWRC members with the project Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of

Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies and the development of the Toolbox of integrated

Performance Evaluation would start directly. As the next action, the discussion on and development of the supporting projects and activities for step 2 and 3 should be initiated to detail and start the projects needed. The project Revamp

Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy reduction could be considered to coordinate and complement the present research activities by individual GWRC members and other related research initiatives (i.e. EU projects NEPTUNE and INNOWATECH). A brief document Water and Energy: a roadmap to the future! to describe the overall goals, objectives and benefits, the drivers and background of the foreseen projects would be of help to communicate these activities by the water and wastewater sector, as well as to support discussions with possible co-funders of the projects at national/international levels. The Board of the Directors of the GWRC will discuss these proposals and finally will have to decide about the collaborative projects that will be executed within the framework of the Water and Energy research strategy.

19

Annex A. Project Proposals (drafts February 2008)

20

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.

Project Title Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies.

Proposed by

After manpower, energy is the highest cost item on the balance sheet of most water and wastewater companies. Over the last decade, energy consumption by the sector has considerably increased as a result of implementation of new technologies to meet new regulations. The price of energy has also substantially increased in the same period. In Europe, some water companies have reported increases in energy costs of over 60% in recent years and with oil prices continuing to escalate, further substantial increases in operating costs are expected. Those increases will be compounded by the need to meet additional new regulations that will require energy intensive treatment processes to achieve tight standards. High energy consumption will affect the water industry world wide and is inextricably linked to the issue of Climate Change. In November 2007, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), published its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) ‘Climate Change 2007’. i The report recognises that adaptation measures are already being implemented, and will be essential in order to address the projected consequences. There is, however, a limit to adaptation. Mitigation measures will also be needed in order to stabilise the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, and to reduce the severity of impacts. Rapid world-wide investments and deployment of mitigation technologies, as well as research into new energy sources will be necessary to achieve a stabilisation of the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The IPCCii concludes that all stabilisation levels assessed might be achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that are either currently available or expected to be commercialised in coming decades. All assessed stabilisation scenarios indicate that 60-80% of the reductions would come from energy supply and use, and industrial processes, with energy efficiency playing a key role in many scenarios. The water industry therefore has a responsibility to work to mitigate climate change by ensuring that it builds and manages its infrastructure in a cost-effective, energy efficient manner. In doing so, it will make a significant contribution to mitigating climate change by reducing its carbon footprint.

Objectives The objective of this project is to develop a Compendium of best practice (worldwide) in the energy efficient design and operation of water industry assets. The expectation is that the output of the project will be a ‘benchmarking tool’ that will be of value to GWRC’s members to guide them towards improving their own ways of working from an energy efficiency

21

perspective. The scope of work will be wide, to cover the principal activities of water and wastewater businessesiii, and will focus on the identification of current best practice, tools and technologies. In addition to an overview of current best practice, the study is expected to identify the promising developments and future opportunities to help deliver: 1. Incremental improvements in energy efficiency through optimisation of

existing assets and operations 2. More substantial improvements in energy efficiency from a ‘paradigm

shift’ in the way that the industry meets its obligations.

Research

Approach

This work will be conducted through a desk top study, involving a comprehensive review of the literature and correspondence with key stakeholders such as water industry operators, regulators, academics, and manufacturers. Issues to be considered should include:

• Design

• Construction

• Operation

• Recovery

• Generation Although the scope of the study is wide reaching, in order to maximise the value of the effort expended on the project, it is expected that the project will concentrate on those water industry activities that are most energy intensive. The majority of GWRC’s membership will be interested in scenarios that apply in industrialised, temperate regions- but the study should also discuss how their findings might apply to other less temperate regions of the world. Case studies, drawn from the practical experiences of GWRC’s members would be of particular interest. The study will include suggestions/possible approach to keep the Compendium up-to-date.

Deliverables

A report and/or web-based portal. Knowledge transfer workshop for GWRC members (and others by invitation).

Potential

Partners

Schedule 2008/09. (1year)

Recommended

Budget (euros)

100,000 €

Comments

i. http;//www.ipcc.ch ii www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf iii Including water treatment and distribution; wastewater conveyance and treatment; water reuse; sludge treatment and disposal.

22

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.

Project Title Define and understand the language

Proposed by Concepts group

Background GWRC offers a platform to compare and learn from best practices of their membership in many areas including energy and water. Terminology, definitions and metrics vary among countries and sectors which hampers a proper comparison of operational practices.

Objectives Define common terms, definitions and metrics for measuring energy efficiency and environmental impact of water cycles and process technology

• understand the language, water/waste water

• build a common platform

• set boundaries of the system

Deliverables

• a common framework of terms, definitions and metrics describing energy demand and environmental impact of water cycles

• Through the web accessible report for GWRC members

Research Approach • Draw up inventory of existing terminologies, metrics

• Agree on system boundaries and common framework of terminologies

• Develop and disseminate common framework

• Organise workshop with IWA

Potential Partners IWA (� large stakeholder group)

Schedule 1 y

Recommended

Budget (euros)

100,000 €

Comments

23

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.

Project Title Minimising energy of existing systems without compromising

quality objectives

Proposed by Concepts group

Background It is widely acknowledged that opportunities exist to further increase the energy efficiency of existing water cycle systems. Operators of systems around the globe are developing and implementing energy efficient technologies and practices for different parts of the water cycle. GWRC membership will benefit from drawing up, further developing and implementing these best practices. Clarity on the potential energy saving would be valuable.

Objectives This project should identify and further develop energy efficient technologies and operational practices, both for water and waste water. This includes a cradle-to-cradle approach covering design build, operations and demolition. The project should also develop indicators to determine the potential energy saving.

Deliverables

• Tool to determine the potential energy saving

• Inventory of best available technologies and practices

• Series of workbooks/monographs for specified processes

Research Approach • Questionnaires/interviews

• Desk study

• Stakeholder-workshop

• Report

Potential Partners IWA

Schedule 2 y

Recommended

Budget (euros)

Scoping study 50,000 €

Comments

24

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4.

Project Title External factors influencing process choice and optimisation

Proposed by Concepts group

Background Practice shows an increasing influence of external stakeholders on the design and operation of water utilities. Regulators set more stringent guidelines for waste water quality, leading to enhanced energy demand of treatment systems. NGO’s and consumer groups put boundaries on system and technology choices of water utilities (desalination of brackish ground water in US, potable reuse in Australia). This may force utilities to less energy efficient solutions.

Objectives Draw up an inventory of external factors influencing solution choices

• Regulators (to integrate regulatory requirements)

• Customers

• NGO’s

• Other stakeholders (e.g. farmers..)

Deliverables

• Inventory of external influencing factors

• Compendium of illustrative cases

Research Approach • Bring together hurdles and impacts

• Analyse several case studies (e.g. CO2 sequestration, bio-solids-handling&disposal etc.),

• Workshop(s)

Potential Partners European & American WWA, Regulators,

Schedule 2 y

Recommended

Budget (euros)

100,000 € to start with scoping

Comments

25

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5.

Project Title An Energy efficient urban water cycle – concepts for the future

Proposed by Concepts group

Background Current wate rinfrastructures have been designed and constructed on the basis of views, requirements, conditions and technologies of decades ago. Future drivers and current technologies might open the door for new concepts for the water cycle

Objectives • Design of new water supply systems (‘eco-city’), new sanitation, treatment, distribution, pipe work, fire vs. potable

• New approach to old ideas

• Decentralisation and/or centralisation

• Sustainable size

• Centralised control / local action

Deliverables

Report on series of scenarios and concepts,

Research Approach • Build on GWRC Trends study

• “Eco-city –concepts worldwide” – desk study of water and energy related projects

• Series of meetings and workshops

Potential Partners SWITCH and TECHNEAU-project (EU), Tianjin (China/Singapore, starts 2008)

Schedule 2-3 y

Recommended

Budget (euros)

200,000 €

Comments

26

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6.

Project Title Designing future concepts in existing systems

Proposed by Concepts group

Background Current waterinfrastructures do not allow a rapid adaptation to new views and technologies. There is a need to establish the potential and benefits of adaptation of current systems.

Objectives • Explore paradigm shift with old assets

• Establish options for conversion and modification of assets with energy efficient technologies, both for drinking water and waste water

Deliverables

Report on series of scenarios and concepts,

Research Approach • Desk study of water and energy related projects

• Series of meetings and workshops

Potential Partners Cooperation with suppliers

Schedule 2 y

Recommended

Budget (euros)

100,000

Comments

27

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7.

Project Title Demonstrations of new concepts

Proposed by Concepts group, Technology Group

Background New concepts get value when proven in practice. Global cooperation offers the opportunity to identify locations to validate and demonstrate new concepts for the water cycle.

Objectives • Identify sites for testing of new concepts (Olympics 2020 / Tienjin 2008,….)

• Explore willingness of local stakeholders to offer site for concept testing

• Set up of partnership with stakeholders including regulators

Deliverables

Report

Research Approach To be filled in later …

Potential Partners

Schedule 3-5 y

Recommended

Budget (euros)

Depends on concept and technology to be demonstrated

Comments

28

Project description for the Tools for Performance Evaluation In the figure below the relations between the 4 project proposals (proposals 8 – 12) developed with the category Tools for Performance Evaluation are given.

Performance assessment

•Costing

•Greenhouse gas

•Energy efficiency

•Impact on bio-diversity

• more…….

State of the art review

Communication for decision making•Social perception

Water

treatment

Wastewater

treatment

Urban water

cycle

Project 1 – identification of gaps and needs

Project 3a Project 3cProject 3b

Project 2 – developing the indicators and defining the data need

Project 3 – creation and updating of process specific models

Project 4 – identification of stakeholder needs and

priorities

Stakeholders

Wate

r in

dustr

y

Performance assessment

•Costing

•Greenhouse gas

•Energy efficiency

•Impact on bio-diversity

• more…….

State of the art review

Communication for decision making•Social perception

Water

treatment

Wastewater

treatment

Urban water

cycle

Project 1 – identification of gaps and needs

Project 3a Project 3cProject 3b

Project 2 – developing the indicators and defining the data need

Project 3 – creation and updating of process specific models

Project 4 – identification of stakeholder needs and

priorities

Stakeholders

Wate

r in

dustr

y

29

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8 (Toolbox #1 )

Project Title State of the science review-synthesis-gap analysis for process

models, performance evaluation and impact assessment methods

for urban water utilities (water, wastewater, storm water, and

water reuse) to manage energy use and greenhouse gas

emissions.

Proposed by Reekie, Whipp, Tee Guan, Crawford, Vince, Palsma

Background Globally, water utilities are faced with the ongoing challenge of providing a safe, adequate, affordable supply of drinking water and sanitation to their customers. The challenge is compounded as clean, available supplies of water continue to be impacted by effects of climate change, water demand by other sectors, ecological water requirements, environmental regulation, rising operation and capital costs, and increasing stakeholder expectations. Energy is a critical component of the ongoing challenge due to rising costs, increased energy demand of advanced treatment technologies, increasing uncertainty of reliable energy supply, and the greenhouse gas emissions associated with fossil fuel derived energy, Drinking water, wastewater, water reuse and storm water utilities (urban water utilities) increasingly collaborate in planning for and managing water resources as they recognize the water resource is one finite resource. A variety of models and methods are used by the water industry to inventory process inputs and outputs, evaluate performance, assess impacts of operations, and evaluate alternatives. To reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, there is a need for the global water community to optimize its tools and capabilities for process modelling, performance measurement, and impact assessment by identifying and reviewing currently used process models, performance indicators, and assessment methods used to manage energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. The review of the science should identify how the models and tools are used for decision-making and risk reduction. Urban water utilities (water supply, wastewater, reuse, and storm water management utilities) use a variety of performance assessment methods to evaluate tradeoffs between economic, energy, environmental and community impacts of capital investment and operating decisions. Performance assessment generally relies on three phases:

• Inventory: Technical process models have been developed to characterize the inputs/outputs (i.e., electricity consumption, chemicals doses, sludge discharge) for each type of treatment process (i.e., activated sludge, membrane treatment, etc.). The inputs/outputs of the processes required by the system under

30

scrutiny (i.e., a given water treatment or wastewater treatment or storm water management alternative) define the global inventory.

• Performance evaluation: Best practices, metrics, and indices have been developed to help utilities evaluate ongoing performance, through comparisons with themselves and other utilities.

• Impact assessment: Impact assessment methods are used to convert the inventory inputs/outputs into environmental (i.e., GHG emissions), social (i.e., damages to human health) or economic impacts. Some methods or tools used for impact assessment include: life cycle assessment, least cost planning, embodied energy assessment, ecological footprint identification, conjoint analysis, social modelling, net present value analysis, least cost planning, life cycle costing, externalities valuation, etc.

The attached figure, “Convention for integrated performance evaluation” helps to illustrate this. There is a need to identify and evaluate the models and methods used by urban water utilities to inventory process inputs and outputs, to evaluate performance, and to assess economic, environmental and social impacts and risks of urban water energy management decisions. The models and methods help utilities define the consumption of resources and the discharge of contaminants relative to urban water management, and to evaluate the impacts. There is a need to compare and contrast the models and methods and identify the gaps for the purpose of refining, synthesizing, harmonizing, or developing new models and methods.

Objectives Review the state of the science of the urban water utilities (drinking water, wastewater, reuse, and storm water) to manage energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. This will include a review of process-specific models, performance indicators, and impact and risk assessment methods; synthesis of the methods and models generally used and accepted for evaluation of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions; description of how the methods and models are used for decision making and risk evaluation; identification of gaps and research needs for refinement and harmonization, or development of more robust models and methods; provision of a framework for proceeding with research projects to meet the research needs.

Deliverables

Provide a final report that summarizes existing process models, performance indicators, metrics, and indices, and impact assessment methods and tools, including a comparison and analysis. Summarize how the tools are currently used for energy management decision support and risk assessment. Develop a framework for harmonizing existing models, indicators, methods, and tools leading to a

31

compendium of best practices and generally used and accepted tools; and provide recommendations for proceeding with future research projects.

Research Approach The work will be done through a desk top study, involving a comprehensive review of the literature and correspondence with key stakeholders in academia, manufacturing, and utilities. Information and input will be solicited from all Global Water Research Coalition members and via the International Water Association network. Identify and define terms, language, and performance indicators commonly used by water utilities 1) to inventory process inputs/outputs, and 2) to evaluate the performance of existing urban water systems, and 3) to assess impacts of urban water management on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, including water production, treatment and distribution; wastewater collection and treatment; water reuse; and storm water collection and treatment. (Create a common language and definitions for the water industry.) Identify the existing benchmarking and process models used by water utilities to characterize the inputs and outputs of specific processes in the urban water cycle including water production, treatment, and distribution; wastewater collection and treatment; water recycling; and storm water collection and treatment. Identify the methods used by water utilities to evaluate the economic, environmental, and social impacts of the urban water energy management decisions (water production, wastewater treatment, water reuse, storm water management). Identify the performance indicators and the type of information needed for the various performance assessment methods. Compare, contrast, and evaluate the methods and the data needs and develop a framework for harmonizing existing process models, performance indicators, and impact assessment methods and tools. Identify gaps and research needs for developing new assessment methods or refining existing assessment methods to help urban water utilities optimize energy use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Provide recommendations for proceeding with future research projects.

Potential Partners IWA Specialist Groups on performance indicators, benchmarking, etc.

Schedule 9 to 12 months

Recommended

Budget (euros)

EU 150 K

Comments

32

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 9. (Toolbox #2)

Project Title Performance assessment

Proposed by Reekie, Whipp, Koh, Crawford, Vince, Palsma

Background Based on the review of what is existing and on the needs of stakeholders, performance indicators should be evaluated and updated.

Objectives • Define the performance indicators and the type of information that would be needed for the performance assessment.

• Define the data needs for input to models for performance assessment evaluation. The model will provide decision support for selection between technologies, scenarios on energy and environmental criteria:

• Water treatment,

• Waste water treatment,

• Urban water cycle planning.

Deliverables

Definition of data needs and development of performance indicators for the performance assessment methods including costing, GHG, energy efficiency, impact on biodiversity, etc..

Research Approach � Through the synthesis of the state-of-the-art review and an understanding of the stakeholders needs, the requirements of the performance assessment will be identified.

� Identify existing performance assessment methods dedicated to water treatment, waste water treatment and more globally to urban water cycle.

� Identify gaps and new requirements.

Potential Partners

Schedule 18 months, starting 6 months after project 1

Recommended

Budget (euros)

EU 300K

Comments

33

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 10. ( Toolbox #3a,3b, 3c)

Project Title Water treatment, urban water cycle and wastewater treatment

Proposed by

Background The project will define the consumption of resources and the discharge of contaminants to be input relative to the urban water cycle, water treatment, and wastewater treatment. This project will quantify consumption and discharge.

Objectives Create and update process specific models including water treatment, wastewater treatment and urban water cycle models.

Deliverables

A detailed process model for each of the inputs needed for performance assessment (water treatment, urban water cycle, and wastewater treatment)

Research Approach Update (or develop new models), test and verify the models. .

Potential Partners

Schedule 18 to 24 months, starting 6 months after project

Recommended

Budget (euros)

EU 200K (per model

Comments

34

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 12. (Toolbox #4)

Project Title Communication for decision making

Proposed by

Background This project will inform and be informed by projects 2 and 3. Communications between research teams will be necessary.

Objectives Identify tools for water utilities to identify stakeholders, needs and priorities. Provide a toolbox to facilitate communication of decisions to stakeholders.

Deliverables

Guidebook to include look-up tables or pick-lists to identify factors and issues to be considered in terms of communicating effectively with stakeholders about the detail of what should be considered in the performance assessment.

Research Approach

Potential Partners

Schedule 18 months

Recommended

Budget (euros)

EU 100K

Comments

35

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 13

Project title Roadmap to Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations to meet

2020 Goals

Proposed by Technology Breakout Group

Background Currently wastewater treatment and water treatment and distribution are very energy intensive. In recognition of climate change and the new carbon-constrained environment, over the near term (by 2020) the water industry needs to produce more renewable energy and/or conserve more energy below current baseline.

Objectives Expand the use of renewable energy production from existing wastewater plants by 20% and/or increase energy conservation to reduce energy consumption by 20%

Deliverables 1. Case studies of plants who made these changes and met goals 2. Matrix of technologies or technology modifications to existing

treatment train necessary to meet goals. What are the achievable efficiencies, depending on scale (small, medium, large)

3. Demonstration projects for new technologies and technology modifications

4. Stakeholder (public, regulators) dissemination

Research

Approach

1. Collect data focusing on utilities achieving these goals 2. Analyze what processes they have: scale, treatment types, locality

characteristics, energy efficiency of units 3. Risk analysis of optimization measures 4. Validate analysis (costs, water quality, performance) by selecting

demonstration projects 5. Differentiate scales 6. Disseminate information to industry

Potential

partners

To be determined. There is considerable overlap with WERF Optimization Challenge projects and the EU project NEPTUNE.

Schedule To begin immediately. (Although this was not one of the top-rated projects from the workshop.)

Recommended

Budget

(Euros)

600,000 € per year for 5 years

36

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 14

Project title Roadmap to Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations to meet

2030 Goals

Proposed by Technology Breakout Group

Background Currently wastewater treatment and water treatment and distribution are very energy intensive. In recognition of climate change and the new carbon-constrained environment, over the long term (by 2030 so that investment in new infrastructure can be included) the water industry needs to become a significant producer of renewable energy and/recovered products.

Objectives Expand the use of renewable energy production from existing wastewater plants by 80% and explore new energy and resource recovery options. Wastewater treatment should become a self-sustaining operation.

Deliverables 1. Identify new technology approaches and treatment chains. Examples include microbial fuel cells and algae as a feedstock for biofuels.

2. Lab scale and pilot scale evaluation of emerging technologies 3. Matrix of technologies, place in treatment train and achievable

efficiencies, depending on scale (small, medium, large) 4. Demonstration projects 5. Stakeholder (public, regulators) dissemination

Research

Approach

7. Identify technology developers and project funding 8. Develop prototype technologies (e.g. fuel cells, anaerobic,

hydrogen, algae, side stream treatment, …) 9. Analyze processes performance and characteristics: scale, treatment

types, locality related effects, energy efficiency of units 10. Consider regulatory and infrastructural changes to implement

solutions 11. Integration or converting existing treatment systems 12. Risk analysis of new technologies 13. Validate analysis (costs, water quality, performance) by selecting

demonstration projects 14. Differentiate scales 15. Dissemination

Potential

Partners

Technology developers, University, Regulators, Utilities

Schedule Start over next 5 years. Some preliminary investigation may begin before to inform process.

Recommended

Budget

(Euros)

Depending on phase and projects on roadmap, coming from technology developers and government. Estimated 10 fold of that for 2020 roadmap.

Comments This is a roadmap, not a project. Ultimately there will be dozens of projects.

37

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 15.

Project title Application of nanotechnology to membranes to improve energy

utilization in water and wastewater applications

Proposed by Technology Breakout Group

Background Use nanotechnology to optimize performance characteristics of membranes, for applications such as - Desalination - Ultrafiltration - Fuel cells - Catalysis - Pathogen removal - Water reuse - Chemical Recovery - Bioreactors - Forward osmosis systems - Bubbleless aeration - Gas separation (biogas improvement)

Objectives 1. Membrane improvement for reverse osmosis (50 % reduction in energy demand)

2. Nanomembranes for forward osmosis 3. Fouling prevention and control 4. Application of nanomembranes for waste water fuel cells 5. Water recovery from fuel cells 6. Benefit-Costs-Performance-Risk analysis

Deliverables 1. Identify State-of-art 2. Application development 3. Bench scale performance assessment (fouling, flux, energy demand)

of new membrane materials for water and wastewater applications 4. Proof of concept

Research

Approach

Research has to deal with three key areas 1. Durability 2. Reliability 3. Integrity

Potential

Partners

Academics, Manufacturers, Government Agencies, Public Stakeholders

Schedule To begin as soon as possible and last for 10+ years.

Recommended

Budget

(Euros)

Unknown

Comments

38

Appendix B

Programme of the GWRC Workshop on Water and Energy London, 20 – 21 February 2008

Tuesday, 19 February

18:00 Welcome dinner - 1 Queen Anne’s Gate, London

Wednesday, 20 February

8.30 Registration Tea/Coffee at Church House, Westminster

9:00 Welcome and introductions by (Mike Farrimond)

• Who is who

• Workshop program and way of working

9:25 Overall introduction of the playfield with keynotes on:

• Role of Energy in the Urban Water Cycle by Elise Cartmell

• Climate Change and Energy Connection by Rob Renner

• Energy and Resource Recovery by Lauren Fillmore

10:45 Tea & Coffee 11:00 Presentation of activities by GWRC members

12:45 Lunch 13:30 Identify knowledge gaps and research needs in break-out groups

• Break-out groups’ assignments

• Break-out groups at work 16:30 Break-out groups’ presentations 17:15 Clustering and prioritisation of themes and topics

18.15 Walking tour followed by dinner

39

Thursday, 21 February

8.30 Tea/Coffee

9:00 Summary of priority knowledge gaps and research needs

9:30 Development of project proposals in break-out groups

• Discuss the topics assigned

• Develop project proposals (format given)

• Present/review the proposals 10:45 Tea/Coffee

11:00 Development of project proposals in break-out groups (cont.)

12:30 Lunch 13:15 Development of project proposals in break-out groups (cont.) 14:45 Tea/Coffee 15:00 Break-out group presentations of the project proposals Clarification questions 16:15 Survey of member interest to support the projects

16:30 Summary of actions and follow up 16:45 Close

40

Annex C. List of participants

Name Organisation Country E-mail

Rob Renner AwwaRF USA RRenner@awwarf.org

Linda Reekie AwwaRF USA LReekie@awwarf.org

Jim Goodrich EPA USA Goodrich.James@epamail.epa.gov

Chris Impellitteri EPA USA Impellitteri.Christopher@epamail.epa.gov

Theo van den Hoven

Kiwa WR Netherlands Theo.van.den.Hoven@kiwa.nl

Jan Hoffman Kiwa WR Netherlands Jan.Hofman@kiwa.nl

Harry Seah PUB Singapore Harry_SEAH@pub.gov.sg

Lee Mun Fong PUB Singapore LEE_Mun_Fong@pub.gov.sg

Koh Tee Guan PUB Singapore KOH_Tee_Guan@pub.gov.sg

Bert Palsma STOWA Netherlands palsma@stowa.nl

Tom Voskamp WB Regge - Dinkel Netherlands t.j.voskamp@wrd.nl

Carlos Peregrina Suez - CIRSEE France Carlos.PEREGRINA@suez-env.com

Sebastian Sturm TZW Germany sturm@tzw.de

Mike Farrimond UKWIR UK mfarrimond@ukwir.org.uk

Pauline Avery UKWIR UK pavery@ukwir.org.uk

Elise Cartmell Cranfield Univ. UK E.Cartmell@Cranfield.ac.uk

Issy Caffoor Environmental KTN UK Issy.caffoor@btinternet.com

Steve Kaye Anglian Water UK sKaye@anglianwater.co.uk

Gordon Wheale UKWIR UK gordon@wheale.fsnet.co.uk

Steve Whipp United Utilities UK Steve.whipp@uuplc.co.uk

Michel Gibert Veolia France Michel.GIBERT@veolia.com

Emmanuelle Aoustin

Veolia France Emmanuelle.AOUSTIN@veolia.com

Lauren Fillmore WERF USA lfillmore@werf.org

George Crawford CH2M-Hill USA George.crawford@ch2m.com

Gerhard Offringa WRC RSA gerhardo@wrc.org.za

Frans Schulting GWRC Netherlands f.lschulting@freeler.nl

41

Annex D. Workshop Presentations

Frans Schulting (GWRC) Workshop Water and Energy - Introduction

Elise Cartmell, Canfield University Role of Energy in the Urban Water Cycle

Rob Renner, AwwaRF Climate Change and Energy Connection

Lauren Fillmore, WERF Energy and Resource Recovery

Chris Impellitteri, US EPA Overview of activities at EPA

Carlos Peregrina, CIRSEE - Suez Overview of activities at CIRSEE

Francois Vince, Anjou Recherche -Veolia Overview of activities at Veolia

Harry Seah, PUB Overview of activities at PUB

Jan Hoffman, Kiwa Water Research Overview of activities at Kiwa

Sebastian Sturm, DVGW - TZW Overview of activities at TZW

Bert Palsma, STOWA Overview of activities at STOWA

Lauren Fillmore, WERF Overview of activities at WERF

Linda Reekie, AwwaRF Overview of activities at AwwaRF

Steve Whipp, United Utilities Overview of activities at UKWIR

Frans Schulting (GWRC) Workshop W&E: Summary & Follow up

42

Annex E. List of identified knowledge gaps and research needs.

1. Knowledge exchange - State of Science

• Clearinghouse that synthesises and shows what we all already know (map of knowledge)

• Knowledge sharing with energy sector and other stakeholders (climate change)

2. Capabilities and limitations of present systems

• Guidance to apply standard methods, parameters and system boundaries

• Workbook/guidelines on best practices for processes

• Limits of current technologies: best practices, benchmarking (input data, metrics)

• Benchmarking: capture and synthesize info, data, definitions on process energy consumption

3. Future concepts/innovation and scenario planning

• Starting from scratch (green field areas)

• Shift from one-dimensional to multi-dimensional policy making

• New concepts needed: this requires big steps and will not result for incremental change

• Sector needs ambitious targets, with government incentives

• Future planning scenarios must take into account uncertainties (e.g. demographics, demand, …), decision tools, etc

• Paradigm shift: engineering and technological design of eco-city (partnering with WRF, EPRI, etc.); Stakeholder involvement needed!

• Research to assist in evaluating, changing and creating a new wastewater treatment train in 2020

• Small versus large systems: what is a sustainable size?

• Reclassification of wastewater (used water) as a resource, not as a waste

• Side effects of CO2 sequestration on water

4. Implementing new concepts and making innovation happen

• Global demonstrations; arena to expedite innovations and new applications

• Adjust (increase) pace of R&D to make impact on policy makers (DSS, demo sites)

• Financial, social and environmental framework to allow successful technology implementation

• Verified demo projects are needed for stakeholder acceptance!

• IPR/single source/ commercial stimulation

• Procurement guidance

43

5. Communication strategies, engagement and image (PR)

• Reclassification of wastewater (used water) as a resource, not as a waste

• Prove net environmental benefit of recycling products including known sanitary consequences (public perception)

• Reference point GHG emissions with and without impact

• Influencing the supply chain (imposing values)

• Education schools and universities

• Coordination between market for electricity generation technologies and product development by vendors

6. Analytical toolbox, modelling

• Energy efficiency rating

• Wastewater process models (GHG emissions)

• Drinking water process models (GHG emissions)

• Benchmarking: capture and synthesize info, standards, metrics, definitions on process energy consumption, ….

• Better models for LCA and whole life costing

• Accounting methods/workbooks to easily assess environmental impact

7. Whole life carbon costing

• What are BATs in carbon constraint environment

• Better models for LCA and whole life costing

8. Technology improvement

• Solids pre-treatment options prior to anaerobic digestion for increased biogas production

• Treatment of biogas to improve marketability

• Coordination between market for electricity generation technologies and product development by vendors

• Improve efficient recovery of by-products

• Alternative energy resources (blue energy, hydro-energy, wind & solar energy, heat pumps…)

• Breakthrough in O2 transfer

• Breakthrough in desalination technology

• Alternative sanitations concepts and approaches

• Better membranes (performance, costs, ….)

• Application of nanotechnology

• Water transfer systems (pumps or ….?)

• Blower- and air transfer equipment

• Smart pump control

• Life Cycle issues of sludge co-generation of electricity

• Demonstrate the use of volatile fatty acids, bio-diesel, butanol from sludge

44

9. Energy recovery, content and management

• Demonstrating sustainable options for sludge cogeneration

• Investigate life cycle costs of small scale hydro turbines in distribution systems

• Investigate life cycle costs (TBL) of other renewable sources : tidal, solar, wind,….

• Improve cost effectiveness of electricity generation options

• Fuel cells, turbines, micro turbines, better utilisation of heat output

• Explore reuse of waste water by-products as biofuels

• Alternative energy resources (blue energy, hydro/wind/solar energy, heat pumps…)

10. Benefit cost analysis (BCA)

• TBL protocols

11. Small scale systems

• Investigate life cycle costs of small scale hydro in distribution system

• BCA evaluation

• Small versus large systems: what is a sustainable size?

• High level of P removal (alternative carbon source needed to achieve high P removal)

12. Infrastructure and other sectors

45

Annex F. Energy Data as provided by the GWRC members and partner

USA NL SIN SUEZ GER UK ZA AUS

Water

Population served (mio) 306,5 16,3 4,5 80 81,8 42 9,97

Volume (Gm3/year) 37 1,11 0,449 3 3,75 3,5 1,42

Total Energy (G kWh/year) 16 0,52 0,202 1,7 3,78

WT (G kWh/year) 0,024 1,4 0,38

WP (G kWh/year) 0,178 0,3 3,4

Wastewater

Population served (mio) 222,8 16,3 4,5 36 77,5 59,5 30 9,97

Volume (Gm3/year) 46,5 1,87 0,58 2,3 5,2 5,8 1,1 0,995

Total Energy (G kWh/year) 0,327 1,2 3,49

WwT (G kWh/year) 21 0,665 0,241 1 3,7

WwC (G kWh/year) 0,086 0,2

Water

Volume (m3/year/cap) 121 68 100 38 46 83 142

Total Energy (kWh/m3) 0,43 0,47 0,45 0,57 1,01 0,1 - 0,5

WT (kWh/m3) 0,05 0,47 0,10 0,1- 0,3

WP (kWh/m3) 0,40 0,10 0,91

Wastewater

Volume (m3/year/cap) 209 115 129 64 67 97 37 100

Total Energy (kWh/m3) 0,56 0,52 0,67 0,4 - 0,9

WwT (kWh/m3) 0,45 0,36 0,42 0,43 0,64 0,39

WwC (kWh/m3) 0,15 0,09 0,1 - 0,6

46

Annex G. Information on Member and Partner Activities Organisation: AwwaRF Contact person: Linda Reekie Email address: LReekie@awwarf.org Available reports

Energy Management for Water and Wastewater Utilities (Reardon, 1994)

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and the Electric Power Research Institute Community Environmental Center (EPRI-CEC) and published by EPRI. It provides a detailed look at electricity consumption for several generic processes used in water and wastewater plants. It describes energy usage patterns for water and wastewater and identifies opportunities for a variety of energy management options. Included are energy management approaches and case study applications.

Ozone System Energy Optimization Handbook (DeMers, Rakness, and Blank, 1996) The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and the Electric Power Research Institute Community Environmental Center (EPRI-CEC) and published by AwwaRF. It is the first publication of a three-phase collaborative research effort between the two organizations called the “Ozone Energy Optimization Project.” It reports on development of a standardized protocol for evaluating ozone system optimization. The protocol was established through conducting three ozone facility evaluations of about one-week duration and follow-up efforts. Ozone Facility Optimization Research Results and Case Studies (Rakness and DeMers, 1998) The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by AwwaRF. It is the second publication of a three-phase collaborative research effort between the two organizations called the “Ozone Energy Optimization Project.” It reports on the evaluation of ten operating ozone facilities to expand the database of information about ozone facilities. It looks at case study examples and strategies for achieving optimization. Advancing Ozone Optimization During Pre-Design, Design and Operation (Rakness and Hunter, 2000) The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by EPRI. It is the third publication of a three-phase collaborative research effort between the two organizations called the “Ozone Energy Optimization Project.” It condenses ideas for ozone optimization during pre-design, design, and operation based on findings during Phases 1 and 2 and selected special studies during Phase 3. The study found potential for lowering capital cost through optimization during pre-design using redundancy and standby equipment. In addition, ozone demand and decay should influence generator and contact sizing decisions. Also, plant administration must make optimization a priority and staff must implement optimization strategies and monitor progress as well as keep meters in proper calibration and equipment in working order.

Energy and Water Quality Management System (Curtice, Jentgen, and Ward, 1997)

47

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF, EPRI-CEC, and East Bay Municipal Utility District and published by AwwaRF. The project concept was partially driven by electric utility deregulation, which presents an opportunity to lower energy costs for water utilities that can optimally manage and control their systems. ‘Quality and supply’ are the boundaries under which the optimization problem can be initiated and solved. A Total Energy and Water Quality Management System (Ladner, Talley, and van Buskirk, 1999) The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by EPRI. The report develops a generic model for an energy and water quality management system (EWQMS) for the water community, and defines standard specifications for software applications required to minimize energy costs within the constraints of water quality and operation goals. Eleven drinking water utilities provided input to the requirements of the EWQMS. Implementing a Prototype Energy and Water Quality Management System (Jentgen et. al., 2003) AwwaRF and EPRI introduced the concept of an EWQMS in a February 1997 report. The report defined an EWQMS as a collection of application software programs that provide information used to develop plans that solve water quality, supply, and energy management problems. Users receive information and prepare plans for daily decision-making. These plans are developed using optimization and simulation techniques embedded in the software programs. The report describes the implementation effort at Colorado Spring Utilities. Optimizing Operations at JEA’s Water System (Jentgen et. al., 2005) The research was a tailored collaboration project with JEA Water and Wastewater, which extended the experience of the previous EWQMS projects to software implementation, installation, testing, calibration, and daily operations of an optimization system. The project expanded previously developed software for optimized system controls of aquifer resources (OSCAR) that was developed to minimize cost while improving water quality and better managing water resources; describes benefits of optimizing operations and includes functional software specifications; and documents experience and lessons learned in the implementation, calibration, and operation of the OSCAR software. Quality Energy Efficiency Retrofits for Water Systems (1997) The project was funded by the California Energy Commission, AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by EPRI. The manual provides information that can help operations and engineering staff in water supply facilities successfully implement common energy efficiency improvements. The manual’s scope is limited to project implementation issues. Best Practices for Energy Management (Jacobs, Kerestes, and Riddle, 2003) The research developed and documented a consortium benchmarking process for water utility application, and tested the application of the process in an energy management benchmarking study. The project resulted in documentation of more than 20 best practices in energy management and a survey tool for utilities to use in assessing and planning their own energy management. The best practices included a description, metrics to measure them, obstacles in applying them, and benefits achieved in using them. Water and Wastewater Industry Energy Efficiency: A Research Roadmap (Means, 2004)

48

Identifies and prioritizes research areas and/or projects that would advance emerging technologies and best practices to improve the energy efficiency, reliability, and costs for water and wastewater treatment facilities. Research partner: California Energy Commission. Water Efficiency Programs for Integrated Water Management (Chesnutt et al. 2007) Identifies direct and indirect costs and benefits of water efficiency incentives and measures in a format that is useful for capital and strategic planning efforts. Provides a framework to evaluate demand-side management options with supply-side options. Also establishes the role of water efficiency programs as a component of an integrated water resources management strategy. Includes a CD-ROM. Research partner: USEPA. Zero Liquid Discharge for Inland Desalination (Bond and Veerapaneni 2007) The project investigated technologies with the potential to reduce the cost and energy consumption for inland desalination with zero liquid discharge (ZLD). The hypothesis tested was that ZLD treatment costs and energy requirements could be reduced by adding intermediate concentrate treatment and secondary reverse osmosis steps to minimize the volume of concentrate to be treated with thermal desalination or pond evaporation. A method was tested that achieved ZLD at 50 to 70 percent less cost and 70 to 75 percent les energy than currently used ZLD methods. Research partner: California Energy Commission Energy Index Development for Benchmarking Water and Wastewater Utilities (Carlson and Walburger, 2007) The project developed metrics and a scoring method to allow comparison of energy use among wastewater and among water utilities. The rating can be used for water utilities to track energy performance over time, target specific facilities for energy efficiency upgrades and evaluate the success of energy efficiency projects. Research partners: California Energy Commission, New York State Energy and Research Development Authority.

Water Consumption Forecasting to Improve Energy Efficiency of Pumping Operations (Jentgen et al. 2007) The research will identify, test, and evaluate available methods and tools for making short-term water consumption forecasts necessary for optimizing pumping schedules and energy use, to support the implementation of an Energy and Water Quality Management System (EWQMS). Research partner: California Energy Commission.

Risks and Benefits of Energy Management for Drinking Water Utilities (Raucher et al. 2008) The project identified and assessed a broad array of energy management options for water utilities, including energy demand and supply alternatives. It applied practical risk management tools to help water utilities select, explain and implement suitable energy management practices. The final report is a reference on energy management strategies, a guidance manual providing a risk management framework for utilities, and a source of illustrative applications of the risk management framework. Research partner: California Energy Commission.

“Evaluation of the Dynamic Energy Consumption of Advanced Water and Wastewater Treatment Technologies” Project #3056 in publication The research documented the energy use, cost, and efficiency of water and wastewater unit operations including UV disinfection, ozone disinfection, microfiltration/ultrafiltration, reverse

49

osmosis, membrane bioreactors, and electrodialysis reversal. It includes a comparison with theoretical energy efficiencies and an identification of the factors affecting energy consumption at ten different treatment facilities. Project partner: California Energy Commission.

Ongoing projects “Review of International Desalination Research” Project #3055 The project will develop a searchable database of current international desalination technology research and development efforts that will include a list of organizations, abstracts, reference documents, potential impacts on cost and energy and an updated status of research efforts. Project period 2006 to 2009. Project partner: California Energy Commission. “Desalination Facility Design and Operation for Maximum Energy Efficiency” Project #4038 The research will compile and analyze data from operating brackish (ground and surface), seawater, and wastewater membrane desalination facilities to result in recommendations for the design and operation of desalination facilities to maximize energy efficiency and reduce energy use and costs, and will also investigate the relationships between plant location, design, operation and maintenance, and energy use and cost. Project period: Project partner: California Energy Commission

Decision Support System for Sustainable Energy Management” Project 4090 The research project will compile a list of tools to assist water utilities with energy management and information gathered using the tools, as well as case studies to develop a decision support tool that will allow utilities to explore and quantify the economic, environmental, and social impacts of various energy management options.

“Evaluating Effects of Climate Change on Water Utility Planning Criteria and Design Standards” Project 4154

The tailored collaboration project will evaluate current planning criteria and design standards for effects due to future climate modification with the purpose of assisting water utilities in the engineering of new facilities. The purpose of the project is to evaluate current planning criteria and design standards for effects due to future climate modification with the purpose of assisting water utilities in the engineering of new facilities. This project will use four case studies from west coast agencies in Seattle, San Diego County Water Authority, Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Energy and greenhouse gas emission reduction will be a component. Project period: 2008 – 2009.

“Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory Guidance, Specialty Protocol Development, and Management Strategies for Water Utilities” Project 4156

The tailored collaboration project with Santa Clara Valley Water District will develop tools to assist water utilities across the United States and Canada to prepare greenhouse gas (GHG) emission inventories using a systematic and consistent methodology. The research team will coordinate with California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) so that the CCAR considers

50

drafting the protocol as part of their GHG inventory and reporting process. Project period: 2008 – 2009. “A New Water Source: Can Fuel Cells Provide Safe and Cost-Effective Potable Water Sources?” Project #4139

This unsolicited research project will assess the viability of integrating fuel cell technologies into the toolbox of options for municipal water providers by quantifying the net water yield, water quality, and net energy output from different types of fuel cells. It will investigate whether fuel cells can be operated to maximize water production instead of energy production and will assess whether additional treatment of fuel cell water is needed to serve as potable water.

51

Organisation: Kiwa Water Research c.s. Contact person: Theo van den Hoven Email address: Theo.van.den.Hoven@kiwa.nl Available reports Benchmark report ‘Water in zicht 2006’ Dutch waterworks (2007) Presents benchmark data of Dutch waterworks, including (trends) in energy consumption and use of renewable energy sources. Mimosa, a model for environmental impact assessment of the water cycle (2003) Excel model to assess environmental performance (including energy and GHG emissions) of all steps in the water cycle. Model contains default values for many processes.

Softening to decrease scaling in hot water installations (various studies in 90s) Studies show that central softening prevents scaling in hot water installations, thus saving energy up to 50%!

Environmental effects of pipe materials (1992) Kiwa report 91.023 (1992), paper in H2O 26, 22, 651 (1993), both in Dutch. Describes and compares environmental impact of pipe materials. The cradle-to-grave analysis addresses all environmental effects including greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. Energy consumption for pipe systems, including coatings and joints, increases as follows (in GJ per 100m of a 100 mm 1MPa pipe): asbestos cement (5,5), GRP (6,9), PVC (6,9), GRE (12), cast iron (36), steel (37). Only qualitative data are reported on GHG emissions (CO2, NOx). Asbestos cement seems to have the lowest emissions. Memstill

TM

A very energy efficient membrane distillation process (Memstill) was developed by TNO, some SMEs and two water utilities (Waternet, Evides). Energy consumption and operation costs are below current RO costs for seawater desalination. The technology can apply low quality waste heat to drive the process. Ongoing projects Climate neutral water cycle (2007- 2008)

• Draws up inventory of climate footprint

• Develops strategy for climate neutral water cycle

• Applies strategy on two cases: Delft municipality and industrial area in Breda.

Various studies on Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) ATES systems are booming in the Netherlands as they substantially decrease energy consumption and related GHG emissions in buildings. These systems may stimulate microbial and hydro-chemical processes in the subsurface. This is interesting for attenuation processes in

52

polluted areas. If it takes place in catchment areas risks may occur for water supply systems. Within the framework of Risk Assessment/Risk Management practices (Water Safety Plans) water utilities investigate these risks. Initiatives at Waternet (Amsterdam)

- Cold water recovery from deep lakes - Energy recovery from domestic waste water - Biogas recovery and reuse from waste water sludge treatment - Integral approach for water and energy at large real estate projects (a.o. Zuid-As)

Blue energy (2003 – 2010) Production of electricity at the interface of fresh and brackish water. Studies and lab- and pilot scale are ongoing. Biological fuel cell (2004 – 2008) Biocatalytic electrolysis to produce hydrogen gas from waste water. Low-pressure advanced oxidation with UV/H2O2 (2007-2010) UV/H2O2 Advanced oxidation using UV radiation as well as with hydroxyl radicals is an effective and aselective barrier for organic micropollutants in drinking water production. Due to high UV absorbance of hydrogen peroxide at low wavelengths, medium pressure lamps emitting a broad spectrum are generally used for this process. Recent research has shown that the use of low-pressure lamps can be as effective as medium pressure lamps for the production of hydroxyl radicals. Establishing the Electrical Energy per Order (EE/O) for relevant organic micro pollutants, it was found that low-pressure UV/H2O2 requires significantly less energy than medium-pressure UV/H2O2. This project with international partners is currently in the phase of pilot testing. Prevention of membrane fouling (2007 – 2009) A number on new innovative membrane concepts, applying techniques based on forward osmosis and air flushing, are under development. These technologies can control and reduce membrane fouling and therefore reduce the energy consumption of these processes significantly. Waste water desalination (2005 – 2009) Discharge of saline waste water streams are an increasing concern for sustainability and the introduction of the European Water Framework Directive. Still, because of technical and economical reasons, saline waste streams are being discharged. Great benefits would be achieved if the discharge of saline waste streams could be minimized or prevented against acceptable costs. Promising treatment concepts for the reduction of saline streams in combination with the application of the utilization of waste heat are investigated.

Comparison of IEX and membrane filtration for demi-water production (2007- 2009) In this study a comparison is made between the application of IEX and membrane filtration for demiwater production. The study considers investment and O&M costs. Energy is an important factor in the comparison.

Treatment scenario’s for fermentation broth (2007- 2009)

53

Biomass fermentation is applied more and more in The Netherlands to produce “green” energy. An important point with a fermentation process is the remaining fermentation broth or digestate. The digestate discharge is expensive and is therefore an obstruction for further development. The research is looking for treatment possibilities that are economically and technically feasible. Water re-use at industrial laundry processes (2007 - 2009) The branch organization of industrial laundries in The Netherlands (TKT) investigates the possibilities of water re-use. The specific goal of this research is reduction of energy demand in the sector. The aim is to reach a reduction of 16 %.

54

Organisation: PUB Singapore Contact person: Yunita Tan Email address: Yunita_TAN@pub.gov.sg Available reports & Finished projects Integrated Anaerobic and Aerobic Treatment of Wastewater – completed The present process to treat municipal wastewater uses physical settlement to remove most of the settleable solids followed by an aerobic process where micro-organisms are used to breakdown the remaining pollutants in the wastewater. This is an energy intensive process. In addition, it produces substantial quantity of sludge that has to be disposed of. The anaerobic process thrives in our tropical environment. It is a net energy and low sludge producing process. By itself, it could not produce the quality of effluent to our standards. However, used in combination with the aerobic process, it could meet standards, help to reduce energy requirements and produce less sludge. Preliminary calculations also show a potential 30% reduction in sludge production and aeration energy by coupling UASB and Activated Sludge. Ultrasonic Disintegration of Sewage Sludge – completed For a country like Singapore with limited natural resources, innovative technologies are required to reduce sludge disposal volume and increase biogas production to recover energy in the wastewater treatment process. The ultrasound disintegration technology has this feature, i.e., it disintegrates sludge solids and enhances anaerobic digestion. The technology was tested in the field under tropical conditions with a full-scale ultrasonic facility and two 5000 m3 egg-shaped digesters, each was fed with mixed primary (one-third) and thickened activated (two thirds) sludge of identical quality and volume up to 200 m3d-1. For the two digesters, all operation conditions were the same except one (test) with and the other without (control) the ultrasonic device to pretreat the sludge feed. Considering an electricity yield of 2.2 kWh m-3 for the biogas from the anaerobic digesters (from historical record of the wastewater treatment plant), the daily total power consumed by the ultrasonic reactor (approx. 288 kWh), the sludge pump (<20 kWh d-1) and the air-conditioning (power rating 1.14 kW) of the reactor control room, the daily net energy gain (NEG) results showed that there was excess energy as a result of the improvement in biogas production. The changes of the NEG with operation time showed a stabilizing ultrasonic plant, where a steady increase in excess energy was evident as a result of sludge sonication. The NEG confirmed that sonication of the sludge prior to digestion was energy sustainable during the entire operation period because of the enhanced anaerobic sludge digestion and the increases in biogas production. The average ratio of the NEG to total power consumption in operation of the sludge disintegration plant was 7.5. The NEG would be one-third more if only secondary sludge were fed to the reactor at the full capacity (200 m3 d-1) with comparable concentrations of sludge solids. It is estimated that further increases could have been achieved if thickened secondary sludge with at least 3% VSS were fed to the ultrasonic reactor instead of the sludge with low solid concentrations.

55

In comparison with the control, the five-month field study showed that the ultrasound pretreatment of the sludge resulted in an increase in the daily biogas production up to 35%. There were no significant differences in compositions of the biogas from the two digesters. When translating the increases in the biogas production into its source – volatile suspended solids, a 25-30% increase in sludge solids removal is expected under optimal hydraulic retention time. Application of Anaerobic Selector at Jurong WRP and Kim Chuan WRP – completed Jurong and Kim Chuan WRP currently uses conventional aerobic process for treatment of wastewater. The anaerobic selector process can be incorporated into the aeration tanks by creating an anaerobic zone in the first pocket of the aeration tank. An anaerobic selector process has been documented to favour the growth of floc forming bacteria and improve sludge settleability. It is also known to be effective in removing phosphates and COD from the wastewater. A significant portion of (Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand) SCOD in the settled sewage (including Acetic Acid) was removed concomitantly with PO4

3—P release in the anaerobic selector. SCOD removal under anaerobic conditioned is verified so savings in aeration energy is possible. The projected reduced in aeration energy of 8% (21 kW) is translated into annual savings of S$20,000 Memstill – completed TNO developed within a Dutch consortium that includes Keppel Seghers Netherland, a membrane-based distillation concept in which multi-stage flash and multi-effect distillation modes are combined into one membrane module. This so-called “Memstill® technology” is expected to improve the economy and ecology of the existing desalination technology for seawater and brackish water favourably. This is especially ascribed to the fact that a Memstill®

module houses a continuum of evaporation stages in an almost ideal counter-current flow process which makes a high recovery of evaporation heat possible. The energy requirement for Memstill® technology can be fulfilled with low-grade thermal energy such as waste heat or renewable energy (e.g. solar energy), which makes Memstill an environmentally friendly process. In collaboration with both National Environment Agency (NEA) and Public Utilities Board (PUB), Keppel Seghers Engineering Singapore carried out testing for more than a year in Singapore on a pilot plant with an initially estimated capacity of 1 – 2 m3/hr. The testing results is shown in the table below:

Parameters Memsing E-On Next Pilot Plant Targeted

Flux (L/hr/m2) 0.25 2.5 5

Energy efficiency (%) 30 50 80

Heat input (MJ/m3) 1000 - 2000

400

Reasonable to assume even better performance judging from improvement made from previous 2 pilot plants

240

Future Memstill modules with improved designs are expected to achieve even higher energy efficiency and less heat input. Thicker spacers are used to allow higher feed flow rate. A different type of membrane condensers are adopted to provide more efficient heat transfer. A third Memstill pilot has been manufactured to include these improvements and will be tested in

56

AVR, Netherlands. The AVR pilot is expected to further link up the gap towards targeted performance parameters. Keppel Seghers intends to build a second Memstill pilot plant in Singapore to further its understanding and experience with Memstill technology and hopefully to demonstrated an improved performance. Ongoing projects Membrane Bioreactor (Demo Plant) – in progress Baseline performance is being established. The plant has been in operation since Dec 06 and have stable operations at membrane flux of 25L/m2-h and energy consumption between 0.5 - 0.6 kWh/m3. This is lower by 0.3 kWh/m3 compare to the normal operation of MBR. The 0.55 kWh/m3 includes the energy required by:

• Drum screen

• Blower for membrane

• Blower for aerobic tank

• Pump for sludge supply from aerobic tank to membrane tank

• Pump for sludge circulation from aerobic tank to anoxic tank

• Pump for membrane filtration

• Permeate pump which pumps the MBR permeate to the product tank which is approx. 400 meter from the MBR plant.

• Valves

• Measurement equipment

• Energy consumption for the MBR control building (air-con, lightings etc). It does not include:

• Raw water pump

• Pumping energy usage to the industrial users after the product tank. Desalination Facility Design and Operation for Maximum Energy Efficiency (AwwaRF

Project 4038) – in progress On July 2006, PUB has agreed to participate in this project together with Black & Veatch (lead agent). PUB will contribute as a participating utility. The energy usage at PUB desalination plant (SingSpring Desalination Plant) will be assessed and if required, will be visited for an evaluation of energy balance within various treatment processes. Any potential means of improving efficiency specific to the utility will be identified. The results will be used to develop general guidelines for similar facilities in future. The project is currently on going. Sludge Drying using Pulver Dryer – in progress PUB is currently testbedding a Three-Stage PulverDryer system to dry and resize municipal sewage sludge. This material is approximately 20% solids and 80% moisture. It is very sticky and hard to handle. The PulverDryer test unit is designed to mix the raw materials with dried materials at about 50% to 50%. That material is then processed through a three stage PulverDryer System that will reduce to total moisture of the final product between 65 to 75% solids. The drying and resizing of the material within the PulverDryer allows the PUB to rethink traditional methods of disposing the material in a landfill. Proper processing of this material in the PulverDryer also kills pathogens to EPA levels so the final product can be classified as fertilizer or disposed of in a much more inert state in a landfill. This material can also be

57

homogenized and blended with waste wood and/or leaves to create a mulch, or even a fuel to be burned in boilers to create steam power for electrical generation. The PUB in Singapore currently processes over 800 tons of this waste material that is a burden to dispose of and costly to handle and transport. The PulverDryer offers PUB the opportunity to reduce overall production cost as well as create a valuable commodity from this waste material. The PUB project commenced operational testing in October of 2004 with all three stages running successfully. Target moisture levels and sizing of material was achieved during initial runs. PulverDryer management will utilize this test site during the next six months to perfect PulverDryer technology and equipment systems. Variable Salinity Plant (VSP) – in progress The Variable Salinity Plant (VSP) produces potable water from rainwater and seawater as well as smaller streams. By tapping on the canal water, the pressure required for the RO process is much lower than that is required for desalination. Thus resulted in energy savings. In addition to the above, PUB is also looking into the following projects: Hydrodynamic Study of Hollow Fiber Membrane Bioreactor to Minimize Energy

Consumption and Membrane Fouling – under evaluation This project is a collaboration project between PUB, A-Star, and Siemens. The objective is to improve cost effectiveness of MBR Technology by substantially reducing energy use by optimizing energy use through fluid dynamic modeling within the MBR and by eliminating the addition of energy added for biofouling prevention with VLR (Vertical Loop Reactor) technology. Excess Biosludge Elimination and Trace Organics Removal Using Integrated Membrane

Multi-reactor (IMMS) Water Reclamation System – under evaluation This project presents a critical important scheme for providing the solutions for excess biosludge elimination and trace organics removal using NTU’s newly patented IMMS technology. This multi-disciplinary research project is aimed to develop the knowledge based necessary to understand the minimization or elimination of biosludge produce, trace organic removal, membrane fouling mechanism and increase water quality. If successful, the project is potential to gain efficiency improvement in energy usage & land minimization for sludge incineration ash Pilot Testing of Membrane Distillation Bioreactor for Wastewater Reclamation – under

evaluation The Membrane Distillation Bioreactor (MDBR) is a novel approach to wastewater reclamation developed at NTU through the Temasek Professor Programme with the help of IESE. Exploit (ASTAR) has taken out a patent on the technology, which has been taken to proof of concept stage from bench to small pilot plant (capacity 100 to 200 litres per day). The aim of this project is demonstrate the viability of the process at a scale of 500 to 700L per day; this is a scale up of 10x requiring about 10 m2 membrane area. The MDBR process replaces the membrane filtration membranes of conventional MBRs with Membrane Distillation (MD) membranes. The main advantages of the MDBR are,

58

(i) The MD membranes only transfer permeate as vapour, so the quality of the product stream can be very high with negligible TOC. Indeed the quality can be as good as, and possibly better than, the product from RO in a conventional reclamation plant ; in essence the MDBR offers the potential for NeWater in one step;

(ii) The MDBR process operates at ambient pressure and only requires a relatively low level of electrical power for circulation and air supply (in contrast to the RO step in conventional reclamation plant);

(iii) Although the MDBR requires a thermal input it can be low grade waste heat as the process operates at <60oC.

The expected benefit from this project is a novel MBR process suitable for water reclamation of wastewater in a single step without the use of high pressure RO, provided low grade waste-heat is available. The process requires very modest amounts of electrical power, estimated at 0.63-1.43 kW-h/m3 c.f. MBR-RO which is estimated to require 1.3-1.4 kW-h/m3 of water produced. As a result the process should achieve both energy and cost savings. Assembling of TiO2 Nanofiber Membrane for Water Treatment – under evaluation The cost for water reclamation is limited by a fouling problem which is caused by the deposition of the foulants on membrane surface such as nature organic matters (NOMs) and bacteria etc. In actual operation, membrane fouling is almost inevitable consequence of membrane filtration. It is clear that membrane fouling (a) decreases the water production (permeate flux), (b) reduces the water quality (pore leaking), (c) causes a change in feed properties, (d) reduces membrane life-span and (e) increases the filtration pressure (energy cost). Research study clearly indicates that membrane fouling increases energy cost which is a major item in treating both water and wastewater. About 80-90% of energy cost is due to pressure development in feed water. If successful, a novel nanofiber filter membrane would be able to overcome the existing problems of polymer membrane fouling problem resulting in lowest water production cost. EWI Challenge Call – call has been closed, proposals are under evaluation Desalination is an engineered process for removal of dissolved mineral salts, organic substances, bacteria, viruses, and other suspended solids from seawater to obtain freshwater. Desalination of seawater can be achieved by either thermal distillation or membrane-based processes. In thermal distillation processes, such as multi-stage flash distillation (MSF), multi-effect distillation (MED), vapour compression (VC) and solar desalination, the main driving force is thermal energy, which causes phase changes in seawater. Membrane-based processes applied usually include reverse osmosis (RO) and electrodialysis/electrodialysis reversal (ED/EDR). Other processes, including ion exchange, freezing, membrane distillation and forward osmosis (FO), have been described, but are seldom used in practice. So far, the prohibitive costs and the acceptability of these technologies are two major concerns that have limited their widespread application in the industry. Presently, about 70% of the world's desalination capacity is still dependent on the thermal distillation processes, which are mainly located in the Middle East. Membrane-based desalination, however, dominates the United States market. Although desalination is known to be an energy-intensive process, the power requirements of different processes can be different, e.g. VC>RO and MSF > MED. Typical power consumption when using reverse osmosis processes is around 3 - 3.5 kilo-watt hour (kWh) per cubic metre of freshwater produced. To achieve a breakthrough in this area, there is a need to move beyond reverse osmosis processes and develop other promising technologies to reduce the power consumption in seawater desalination.

59

The Environment and Water Industry Development Council (EWI) aims to support the development of innovative/breakthrough technologies from its infancy to the commercialization stage. Novel, promising technologies will be funded in a coordinated manner so that there is holistic development in both technical and commercialisation aspects of the technology. The Domain for this call is Seawater Desalination. Applicants are requested to propose an innovative technology that can lead to a breakthrough in this domain and meet the following criteria:

• Production of drinking water that meets World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, 3rd edition, incorporating first addendum;

• Total energy consumption of 1.5 kilo-watt hour (kWh) per cubic metre of water produced or less;

• Using seawater as the feed water. The call for the challenge RFP has been closed and the proposals are being evaluated.

60

Organisation: STOWA - Foundation for Applied Water Research Country: Netherlands Contact person: Bert Palsma Email address: palsma@stowa.nl Available reports STOWA report 2005.26 ; energy efficiency in wastewater management How to minimise fossil energy use for oxidizing COD in wastewater to CO2. Including nutrient removal (P-recycling) and sludge management. STOWA report 2005 W03 The potential of biogas production on Wastewater Treatment Plants GWRC workshop on “Energy and Resource Recovery from Wastewater residuals solids” (see also WERF) Ongoing projects STOWA is involved in a number of projects related to the energy topic including the examples below. Sneek Separate black water collection and digestion including energy recovery. Pilot project in 32 houses in the city Sneek. Beverwijk Methane recovery in sludge digestion pilot project on Wastewater Treatment Plant Beverwijk of Water Board Hollands Noorderkwartier (350.000 i.e., 22.064.300 M3/year) Carbon footprint of urban water management (in cooperation with Kiwa) Information collection, benchmarking, and identification of possibilities for optimisation of operations

61

Organisation: TZW - Germany Contact person: Sebastian Sturm Email address: sturm@tzw.de Available reports No reports available yet Ongoing projects

Overview of TZW activities regarding the topic water & energy that may result in conflicts between renewable energy production and protection of water resources Renewable raw materials/biogas plants and water pollution control – evaluation from the point-of-view of the water supply - DVGW project # W 1/03/05 The European Union strives to increase the quota of renewable energy on the primary energy consumption. Thereby the greenhouse gas emissions shall be reduced and the dependency of the EU on energy imports shall be decreased as well. In Germany, this political target caused a rapid growth of the power-generation from biogas and an increase in bio fuel production. This development and the strong rise of grain crop prices are associated with an intensification of agriculture, resulting in a growing hazard potential for the drinking water resources and the water supply due to the use of fertilizers and pesticides. Another risk may result out of the agricultural use of fermentation residues of biogas plants. Depending on the type of co-substrates like waste grease, slaughter waste or composting bin wastes, fermentation residues may contain heavy metals or organic trace contaminates like pharmaceuticals or other substances, which have a potential to accumulate in the soil or to leach into the groundwater. The ongoing TZW project investigates possible risks for the water utilities but also the chances for protection of the drinking water resources. If, for example, aspects of an appropriate crop rotation are taken into account, the cultivation of energy crops can help to reduce the nitrate levels in groundwater. Also the use of herbicides can be reduced under certain circumstances. Project duration 7/2006 to 3/2008

Sustainable production of fermentation gas (biogas) and feed into gas distribution network - Evaluation of long-term effects on soil, plant, air and water - DVGW project # GW 1/01/07 The total process chain from the biomass production to generation of Substitute Natural Gas (SNG) will be considered in the context of sustainability. Project duration 1/2008 to 12/2008 Geothermal power and groundwater protection - current TZW activities The increasing number of geothermal drillings in some areas in Germany poses another threat to groundwater quality, especially in water protection areas. So water utilities have to keep an eye on the development in this energy related topic as well. Water suppliers have to warn other stakeholders if the groundwater resources face new possible hazards. TZW participates in the relevant German technical committee on standardization and a scientific panel to reduce the risks of groundwater contamination.

62

Organisation: UKWIR Contact person: Pauline Avery Email address: pavery@ukwir.org.uk Available reports 04/WW/04/9&10: Sustainable WWTW for Small Communities

Vol I: Sustainability and the Water Industry

Vol II: BPSO Methodology Handbook Sustainable development is of particular interest to the water industry which finds itself having to comply with increasingly stringent standards for wastewater effluent quality whilst being pressed to minimise the cost to the consumer. Treatment processes suitable for achieving these high standards of effluent quality are likely to involve increased costs, energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions. These issues are particularly relevant to small wastewater treatment works which are more likely to be located in remote situations where the application of complex high-energy processes are probably inappropriate. Volume I discusses the background to sustainability considerations within the water industry and presents the framework for the methodology. 07/CL/06/5: Climate Change, the Aquatic Environment and the Water Framework

Directive This project examined the likely effects of climate change on UK water industry compliance with the Water Framework Directive (WFD), set in the context of other expected changes, such as demographic shifts or changes in land-use. A range of other drivers were identified - changes in energy prices, new regulatory targets for energy efficiency, water conservation and flooding, demographic and land use changes, and new environmental legislation – that are likely to directly or indirectly affect the water industry.The report proposes a Conceptual Assessment Framework to identify linkages between different drivers and industry operations and specific aspects of performance. The framework of drivers and effects was then used to assess the effects of the WFD, climate change and other drivers, which, with further development, could be used by water companies to identify appropriate responses. Ongoing projects Optimising Energy Efficiency at WWTW Sites The project will set the framework within which all other energy efficiency R&D projects at WWTW will take place. In terms of Biogas it will aim to achieve the following:

• Full technological appraisal of the current and future possible uses for biogas with an informed cost-benefit analysis based on likely future movements in fuel prices.

• Full review of digestion and biogas production to determine what options are available for improving both quality and quantity of biogas.

• Assessment of the implications of moving towards waste management

63

Organisation: United States Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Research and Development

National Risk Management Research Laboratory Contact person: James A. Goodrich, Christopher A. Impellitteri Email address: Goodrich.james@epa.gov, Impellitteri.christopher@epa.gov Available reports Reports/factsheets through EPA’s WaterSense program for water conservation (too numerous to list individually) available at: http://www.epa.gov/watersense/pubs/index.htm WaterSense is a partnership program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. USEPA EnergyStar Program (see http://www.energystar.gov/) Reports, facts, data on reducing energy consumption via more efficient home appliances. Separate categories for washers, dishwashers, etc. Department of Energy-National Energy Technology Laboratory (http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/ewr/water/power-gen.html) Overviews and reports on power plant consumption of water. Energy-Water Nexus- Identifies emerging energy-water issues and potential impacts in the US. Report to Congress available at: http://www.sandia.gov/energy-water Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Reports/research mainly focusing on water supply for energy production. www.epri.com Ongoing projects USEPA-Office of Research and Development-National Risk Management Research Laboratory

Conversion of Wastewater Treatment Facilities into Biorefineries Optimization of microbial communities and testing of microbial products (e.g. lipids) in the production of biofuels (biodiesel) from wastewater and wastewater treatment residuals. Project to commence in 2008. Water/wastewater Treatment and Water Re-use in ligno-cellulosic based ethanol plants. Characterization of wastewater from a variety of ligno-cellulosic-based ethanol plants. Development, testing and evaluation of technologies for WW treatment and water re-use.

64

Organisation: WERF

Contact person: Lauren Fillmore Email address: lfillmore@werf.org Available reports

Cost-effective Energy Recover from Anaerobically Digested Wastewater Solids

(01-CTS-18-UR) Hydromantis

This project resulted in Life Cycle Assessment Manager for Energy Recovery (LCAMER), a unique spreadsheet-based tool, available from WERF, which enables wastewater treatment plant owners and engineers to make informed decisions on the feasibility of recovering energy from anaerobic digestion of wastewater solids. LCAMER is available in either U.S. or metric units of measurement. Using a life cycle assessment approach, which incorporates factors such as equipment lifetime and the cost of borrowed money, model users can compare the payback periods or internal rates of return for a variety of:

• anaerobic digestion processes (mesophilic, thermophilic, temperature-phased);

• gas pretreatment processes (hydrogen sulfide, siloxanes and carbon dioxide);

• energy recovery processes such as boilers, generators, turbines, fuel cells and direct drive engines.

State of the Science Report on Energy and Resource Recovery from Sludge for the Global

Water Research Coalition (of which WERF is a member) (OWSO3R07) Hydromantis

The report is a review of current knowledge, based on a literature survey of the current and emerging technologies for the recovery of energy and resources from wastewater solids and solid streams. A triple bottom line assessment of the current and emerging technologies was conducted to the extent possible, given limited data. The objectives of the workshop are to (1) identify research needs and knowledge gaps in energy and resource recovery from sludge; (2) prioritize research needs to address knowledge gaps; and (3) develop research concepts and proposals.

Ongoing projects Evaluation of Processes to Reduce Activated Sludge Solids Generation and Disposal (05-

CTS-3) CH2M-Hill

The project team has conducted a literature search of known technologies and processes used to reduce WAS sludge mass. Technologies with full scale installations will be analyzed for non-financial issues (such as scalability, overall performance, etc.) in a desktop evaluation for both industrial and municipal applications. The project will result in a framework to evaluate different technologies taking into account site-specific conditions, based on both economic and non-economic factors.

Development of a Nitrifying Fuel Cell for Sustainable Wastewater Treatment

(06-UN-1-18) Dr. Nancy Love University of Michigan

65

Emerging technology has been developed to capture energy present in wastewater for electricity generation through the development of microbial fuel cells. Most of the microbial fuel cell efforts have focused on energy from the carbon metabolism. Researcher will evaluate ammonia oxidation in lieu of carbon oxidation as a promising new renewable energy technology, using recent advances in nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science.

Co-digestion of Organic Waste Products with Wastewater Solids (OWSO5R07) CDM

Co-digestion of organic wastes with wastewater solids is used to treat industrial, agricultural and commercial organic wastes. As a result of co-digestion, there has been an observed increase in biogas production, reduced electrical and natural gas demand, extended landfill life, reduced greenhouse gas production and a new revenue source from waste tipping fees. Currently anaerobic digester performance and operations is based on indirect measurements that include volatile solids reduction and loading rates. These indirect measurements work for wastewater solids because of the extent of empirical data on the treatment of wastewater solids. This changes when the digester feedstock is altered with other organic wastes. The development of data is essential to make co-digestion an efficient process to be implemented by municipalities. Current a Waste Characterization Protocol under development. Laboratory analysis will be underway this summer.

Energy Management (OWSO6R07) SAIC

A substantial amount of information exists regarding energy efficiency opportunities at wastewater treatment plants, including benchmarking studies in US and Europe. Facility level energy benchmarks are largely voluntary and implementation of these measures has progressed unevenly. While some states have energy programs that are well synchronized with their planning and design guidelines, many do not. In addition, many design guidelines suggest that facilities be planned and designed over a 20-year period which may result in over capacity and inherent energy inefficiency in the early years of operation.

Value analysis is an established and often required step during planning and design phases. Value analysis practitioners are certified through SAVE International and include experts in a variety of disciplines. VA practice, as it relates to energy reduction for wastewater treatment, can be improved by incorporating energy efficiency, renewable energy production, CHP and other concepts in the model standard. This project will:

• improve VE practice as it relates to energy reduction for wastewater treatment facilities;

• focus on pathways to promote the VE practice with the SAVE Foundation and improve VE in regards to liquid treatment and solids handling process energy efficiency

• evaluate the feasibility of establishing a national standard for VE of wastewater treatment facilities modeled after the existing ASTM Standard E-1699 or alternative (e.g., VALUE international).

Characterization of Greenhouse Nitrogen Emission from Wastewater Treatment Operations Columbia University

A new project just started to develop, calibrate and validate biochemical models for N2O production by autotrophic nitrification and denitrification processes to characterize nitrogen GHG emissions from wastewater treatment.

Case Study of Best Practices for Sustainability CH2M-Hill

66

A new project to develop parameters to define sustainability in a carbon constrained environment. Once the parameters for measurement have been developed, they will be applied at the Strass WWTP in Austria which is self-sustaining with regards to energy. This project will result in the collection of data to evaluate the process optimization decisions made at the Strass plant. Process changes made and the results that yielded the current energy sustainability will be documented in a case study. Emphasis will be made on assessing the impact to the carbon footprint of these changes for an assessment of net environmental benefit.

67

Organisation: Water Research Commission Contact person: Jay Bhagwan Email address: jayb@wrc.org.za Available reports Reservoir system operational optimisation. WRC Report 757/1/98 The project developed an operational model for reservoir control to minimise pumping costs. Software was developed which allows the user compare the effects of different operation policies and costs on the total running cost of the system. Review of factors that influence the energy loss in pipelines and procedures to evaluate the hydraulic performance for different conditions. WRC Report 1269/1/06 and accompanying software, TT 278/06 The project quantified the economic influence of increasing friction losses in pipe systems. The influence of water quality, operating conditions and the hydraulic performance of different liner systems and pipe materials, as well as life cycle costs, were incorporated. Quantifying the influence of air on the capacity of large diameter water pipelines and developing provisional guidelines for effective de-aeration. WRC Report No 1177/04 The study has confirmed that flow velocity; air bubble size and the down-slope of the pipeline are the main contributing factors which determine whether the air can be removed hydraulically. It showed that air in pipes do contribute significantly to energy loss through friction increase. Based on the study and results, provisional guidelines were prepared, describing the influence of air on the capacity of large diameter pipes and providing details to ensure effective de-aeration. Furthermore an air valve sizing and positioning (ASAP) procedure has been developed and incorporated into utility software for the determination of air valve sizes and locations. Development of a solar-powered reverse osmosis plant for the treatment of borehole water. WRC Report No 1042/1/01 The project aimed to design and construct a RO unit, powered by solar energy, capable of producing potable water from brackish borehole feed for rural households or small communities. The project team provided basic and practical guidelines for the sizing and choice of reverse osmosis unit and solar cell combination for the planning and implementation of water supply from such groundwater sources. Ongoing projects Development of a wave-energy reverse osmosis system. WRC Project 1000198 The project aims to further develop a reverse osmosis prototype system which utilizes ocean wave power in order to produce the elevated pressures required in the desalination of sea water to potable standards. A few prototypes will be constructed to evaluate the effect of various wave parameters on the system performance and improve the system into a practical, working technology. Term: 2008 - 2010 Energy from waste. WRC Project 1000230 This project aims to provide guidelines for the national approach to be taken in generation of energy from wastewater and wastewater residues. Term: 2007 – 2008.

68

Organisation: WSAA & CRC WQT Contact person: Tony Priestly (CSIRO) Email address: Tony.Priestley@csiro.au Energy Consumption in the Provision of Urban Water Services

Why Local Conditions Matter

Introduction The provision of urban water services in Australia is a major undertaking involving businesses with an annual turnover in excess of $6 billion. Pressure is mounting on the volumes of water available for use in urban areas and questions are being asked as to the long term sustainability of water supply to Australia’s growing urban communities. A key aspect of any consideration of sustainability issues involves energy consumption. In theory, if abundant energy is available at a relatively cheap price and with no long term environmental limitations, then Australian cities have no water crisis. Seawater desalination is an essentially inexhaustible supply, so long as the energy required can be sourced. Of course, the reality is that energy supplies are not inexhaustible and climate change is imposing a shadow over the cheaper sources of power such as coal. This study looks at the use of energy to provide urban water services in some of the major urban centres in Australia and seeks to understand the drivers behind the variations in observed energy consumptions. In doing so, it will contribute to the debate on the sustainability of urban water systems and allow comparisons to be made with alternative design approaches. Energy Use in Urban Water Systems Water is an essential underpinning of any civilization and has long history of use in urban areas dating back to Roman times. Urban water services entail the provision of a safe water supply for a range of uses including drinking, washing, food preparation, garden watering, waste disposal and a range of commercial and industrial needs. The services also include the disposal of wastewater and the management of stormwater, encompassing what has become known as the urban water cycle. In general, there is very little public understanding of the enormous resources required to provide these services and certainly no knowledge of the energy consumption implications. Tables 1 and 1A below provide a detailed breakdown of energy consumption for four of Australia’s major urban areas, Sydney, Perth, Melbourne and Brisbane. Analysis of this data provides some understanding of what drives energy consumption in the provision of urban water services. Energy consumption in the form of both electricity and natural gas for water supply and waste disposal is outlined and, in some cases, broken down into energy consumed in pumping and treatment. The data paint an interesting picture across the different cities and highlight the fact that local geography, topography and environmental regulations play a major role in determining energy consumption. An important point to note is that, despite water authorities being major energy

69

consumers, the actual energy consumed per head of population served is quite low at between 250 to 420 MJ/annum, compared with the total energy consumption of the average Australian of around 257,000 MJ per annum (ABS, 2004). In most cases the dominant form of energy used is electricity, although Melbourne is an exception here with 37.5% of its energy requirements coming from natural gas about two thirds of which is internally generated (biogas from wastewater treatment). There are a lot of data contained in Tables 1 and 1A and the key messages only emerge when detailed comparisons are carried out between the different cities. The following analysis is an attempt to draw out these messages by looking at each city individually and in comparison to the others. The raw energy data were supplied by each water authority and supplemented by data drawn largely from WSAA Facts 2005. Sydney Sydney is Australia’s largest urban complex and Sydney Water in 2004-05 provided water to 4.228 million people. Its total energy use per person per year is 320 MJ, about 40% of which is used in water supply and the remainder for wastewater disposal. However, these figures are somewhat skewed by the fact that the energy requirements of 4 privately owned and operated water filtration plants supplying Sydney are not included in these figures. This situation is reflected in the relatively low energy requirement provided for water treatment (2.5%), with a significantly greater demand coming from pumping requirements (35%). Wastewater management requires the majority of Sydney’s energy consumption (60%), with energy for treatment (51%) dominating that for pumping (9%). This situation is explained by the fact that Sydney disposes of most of its sewage through the deep ocean outfalls and does not have to pump sewage long distances. It contrasts markedly with the situation in Melbourne where considerable energy is used to pump sewage long distances to either the Western Treatment Plant or the Boags Rocks Outfall. It also highlights the fact that any move away from the deep ocean outfalls is likely to add considerably to Sydney Water’s energy requirements. A comparison of power consumption rates in KWh/m3 is also given in Table 1A. Again the power requirement for sewage treatment (0.40 KWh/m3) dominates, although it is important to note that this figure is closely matched by Perth and Melbourne. However, Perth and Melbourne treat most of their sewage to secondary or tertiary levels, while the majority of Sydney’s treatment is primary only. Perth In contrast to Sydney, the majority of Perth’s energy consumption goes into water supply (62%). The major reason for this situation is that a large fraction of Perth’ water supply comes from groundwater and requires significant pumping energy to drive it to a treatment plant and then through the distribution system. Because of its relatively low quality, this groundwater also requires significantly more treatment than Sydney’s. For example, Perth has adopted a number of innovative water treatment technologies, such as MIEX, in order to prevent taste and odour problems arising in their networks. Consequently, Perth’s total energy use per person per year (412 MJ) is about 30% higher than Sydney’s, but not as high as Brisbane (522MJ). On the sewage side, Perth is fairly representative of a conventional system and its energy consumption reflects this fact.

70

The most significant future energy demand for Perth will arise from its decision to build a sea water desalination plant to augment its water supply. This plant is projected to supply 45,000 ML per annum of water with a power consumption of around 185,000 MWh. This represents a power consumption rate of around 4.1 KWh/m3 compared with 0.46 KWh/m3 for its present supply. This additional demand will approximately double Perth’s present power consumption to around 800 MJ/person/year. However as pointed out earlier, this is still a tiny figure in comparison to the total average energy consumption per head in Australia of 257,000 MJ/person/year. Melbourne Melbourne’s power consumption figures are dominated by two factors. Firstly, greater than 90% of Melbourne’s water supply comes from fully protected catchments located in the mountains to the east of the city. These catchments are at a significant elevation and, as a consequence, most of Melbourne’s supply is fed by gravity with little to no need for pumping. Also, because of the high water quality obtained from the protected catchments, these supplies require minimal treatment. Both of these factors result in Melbourne having a very low power requirement for water supply (0.13 KWh/m3). On the other hand, Melbourne is required to pump its sewage significant distances before final disposal and needs to treat most of it to tertiary levels to achieve significant nitrogen removal. Both of these activities are energy demanding, with the consequence that Melbourne has the highest energy consumption rate (0.94 KWh/m3) of all the major capitals. This figure is more than double that of Sydney at 0.47 KWh/m3. However, Melbourne also generates significant energy of its own, through biogas generation at the wastewater treatment plants, an action which reduces its imported energy consumption rate on sewage to 0.6 KWh/m3. Because of the above factors, Melbourne’s energy split between water supply and wastewater disposal of 16/84 is in stark contrast to other cities, especially Perth and Brisbane where water supply dominates the energy situation. Brisbane Like Perth and in stark contrast to Melbourne, Brisbane expends most of its energy on water supply (66%). Part of this result can be ascribed to the fact that Brisbane also provides water to six other councils around Brisbane, but does not look after their wastewaters. However, the key reason is that most of Brisbane’s water supply has to be pumped to the Mt. Crosby reservoir, a significant lift, so that it can be gravity fed to the city. Brisbane’s water supply also requires significant treatment at Mt. Crosby, which also adds to the power demand, although the figures provided for Brisbane do not break down this demand between pumping and treatment. On the sewage side, Brisbane has a fairly conventional sewage system, with an energy demand that is at the high end of the norm (0.42 KWh/m3). The most interesting figures coming from the Brisbane data involve specific power consumption rates at a variety of wastewater treatment plants, both large and small, and a reuse scheme involving reverse osmosis of a tertiary effluent. Power consumption rates in conventional sewage treatment are shown to vary from a low as 0.17 to as high as 1.14 KWh/m3. This variation can be explained in part by the degree of treatment required, but is also clearly related to plant size. The big plant at Gibson Island (0.4 KWh/m3) is clearly more efficient in energy terms than some of the smaller plants, such as Karana Downs (0.838 KWh/m3). An industrial water reuse scheme also operates at the Gibson Island plant and involves reverse osmosis, the same technology as used in sea water desalination (see Perth). In this case, primarily because of the lower total dissolved solids of the source water, power consumption rates of 1.18 KWh/m3 have been obtained compared to 4.1 KWh/m3 forecast for the Perth plant.

71

Table 1. Summary Energy Consumption across Major Urban Water Authorities (04-05)

GJ of energy Sydney Perth Melbourne Brisbane

Total population

served

4.228 million 1.484 million 3.583 million 0.975 million

Total energy all demands (GJ)

1,351,413 611,386 1,285,554

Total electrical energy

1,329,213 (98.4%)

610,219 802,954 (62.5%) 509,340

Total gas or diesel energy

22,200 (1.6%) 1,167 482,600 (37.5%)

Total energy water

supply

506,651* (37.5%)

378,861 202,862**

(15.8%) 337,918

Volume of water

supplied (ML)

526,367 228,638 440,982^ 255,009^^

Total energy water

supply - pumping

473,672 257,094 166,109

Total energy water

supply – treatment*

32,978 121,766 36,753

Electrical energy - water supply

502,575 (37.2%)

378,861 202,862 (15.8%) 337,918

Gas energy - water supply

4,076 (0.3%) 0 0

Total energy

sewerage

772,435 (57.2%)

231,531 1,074,975 (83.6%)

171,422

Volume of

wastewater collected

(ML)

454,262 110,965 318,327 113,382

Total energy

sewerage - pumping

115,812 79,506 633,369

Total energy

sewerage - treatment

656,622 152,024 441,606

Electrical energy sewerage

764,489 (56.6%)

230,364 592,376****

(46.1%) 171,422

Gas energy sewage 7,946 (0.6%) 1,167 482,600#

(37.5%)

Other (gas & electricity)***

72,328 (5.3%) 995 7,717 (0.6%)

*excludes energy consumption of 4 privately owned and operated water filtration plants supplying Sydney ** excludes energy consumption in 1 privately owned and operated treatment plant *** excludes use of vehicle fuels **** includes 77,902 GJ of electricity internally generated from biogas # includes 309,570 GJ of energy from internally generated biogas ^ excludes 128,889 ML of water supplied directly for environmental flows only

72

^^ includes 78,191 ML of water supplied to surrounding councils Table 1A – Energy consumption analysis

Sydney Perth Melbourne Brisbane

Total energy use /person/year (MJ)

320 412 360 (250*) 522

Water sewerage energy split as a %

40/60 62/38 16/84 66/34

Power

consumption

rates KWh/m3 ↓

Total water 0.27 0.46 0.13 0.37

Total sewerage 0.47 0.58 0.94 (0.6*) 0.42

Water pumping 0.25 0.31 0.11

Water treatment 0.02** 0.15 0.02

Sewage pumping 0.07 0.2 0.55 (0.21*)

Sewage treatment 0.40 0.38 0.39

* Imported energy only

** Does not include power consumption from 3 privately operated plants